BEFORE  THE 

Interstate  Commerce  Commission. 

Docket  No.  9200. 


IN  RE  RAILWAY  MAIL  PAY. 


BRIEF  FOR  THE  POSTMASTER  GENERAL  OF  THE 
UNITED  STATES. 


WASHINGTON  :  OOVEB.VMGXI  PttlNTINO  OmCB  :  1910 


CONTENTS. 


Statement  op  the  case. 


43 


> 


Digest  of  Post  Office  Department  exhibits 48 

Post  Office  Department  Exhibit  No.  1.— Pamphlet  of  informa- 
tion, issued  by  the  Second  Assistant  Postmaster  General, 
relative  to  the  transportation  of  mails  by  railroads  and  com- 
prehending instructions  and  rulings  under  the  act  of  July  28, 
1916 — the  space  system 48 

Post  Office  Department  Exhibit  No.  2. — Standard  floor  plans 
for  convertible  60-foot— 30-foot  and  1 5-foot— 30-foot  mail  cars        48 

Post  Office  De]iartment  Exhibit  No.  3. — Statement  showing 
the  number  of  cars  and  car  units  remodeled  or  changed  sub- 
sequent to  adoption  of  standard  plans  of  February  26,  1912, 
and  prior  to  November  1,  1916,  and  for  the  period  subse- 
quent thereto - 50 

Post  Office  Department  Exhibit  No.  4.— Statement  showing 
annual  miles  of  service,  annual  rates  of  line  pay,  and  initial 
and  terminal  allowances,  by  units  of  service,  on  railroad 
mail  routes,  stated  upon  the  space  basis  of  pay,  authorized  on 
November  1,  1916,  and  the  unit  rates  per  mile  for  author- 
ized ser\dce 50 

Post  Office  Department  Exhibit  No.  5.— Statement  showing 
annual  miles  of  service,  annual  rates  of  line  pay,  and  initial 
and  terminal  allowances,  by  units  of  service,  on  railroad 
mail  routes,  stated  upon  the  space  basis  of  pay,  authorized 
on  March  27,  1917,  and  the  unit  rates  per  mile  for  authorized 
ser^dce 52 

Post  Office  Department  Exhibit  No.  6.— Statement  showing 
annual  miles  of  service,  annual  rates  of  line  pay,  and  initial 
and  terminal  allowances,  by  units  of  service,  on  railroad 
mail  routes,  stated  upon  the  space  basis  of  pay,  authorized 
on  June  30,  1917,  and  the  unit  rates  per  mile  for  authorized 
service 53 

Post  Office  Department  Exhibit  No.  7. — Statement  showing 
annual  miles  of  service,  annual  rates  of  line  pay,  and  initial 
and  terminal  allowances,  by  units  of  ser\dce,  on  railroad 
mail  routes,  stated  upon  the  space  basis  of  pay,  authorized 
on  March  31,  1918,  and  the  unit  rates  per  mile  for  authorized 
service 55 

Post  Office  Department  Exhibit  No.  8.— Statement  showing 
annual  miles  of  service,  annual  rates  of  line  pay,  and  initial 
and  terminal  allowances,  by  units  of  service,  on  railroad 
mail  routes,  stated  upon  the  space  basis  of  pay,  authorized 
on  June  30,  1918,  and  the  unit  rates  per  mile  for  authorized 

56 


service 

122698 19 1 


4 ! 2S20 


Digest  of  Post  Office  Department  exhibits— Continued.  Page. 

Post  Onico  Department  Exhibit  No.  9.— Statement  showing 
amounts  of  line  pay,  initial  and  terminal  allowances,  and 
total  pay  for  service  on  railroad  mail  routes,  stated  upon  the 

space  basis,  for  the  month  of  April,  1917 58 

Post  Office  Department  Exhibit  Mo.  10.— Statement  showing 
amounts  of  com])cnsation  paid  for  service  on  railroad  mail 
routes,  stated  u])on  the  weight  basis  of  pay,  for  the  month  of 

April,  191 7 58 

Post  Office  Department  Exhibit  No.  11.— (1)  Statement  show- 
ing by  weighing  sections  the  total  average  weight  of  mails 
carried  per  day;  length  of  routes;  pound-miles  per  day,  and 
computed  ton-miles  for  the  year  1917,  based  u})on  the  re- 
turns of  the  special  weighing  of  the  mails,  March  27  to  April 
30,  1917,  inclusive;  (2)  computed  annual  ton-mileage, 
1917,  based  on  returns  of  special  weighing,  March  27  to  April 
30,  1917,  inclusive,  compared  with  ton-miles,  last  preceding 

weighing 59 

Post  Office  Department  Exhibit  No.  12.— Statement  of  the 
average  loads  carried  in  the  several  units  of  authorized  mail 
space,  grouped  according  to  the  vseveral  State  route  numbers, 
based  upon  a  special  weighing  of  the  mails  during  the  week 

April  12  to  IS,  1917,  inclusive 60 

Post  Office  Department  Exhibit  No.  13.— Table  showing  com- 
parison of  the  annual  rate  of  compensation  for  railroad  trans- 
portation of  the  mails  by  companies  in  effect  October  31, 
1916,  under  weight  basis  of  pay,  on  November  1,  1916,  when 
the  space  basis  became  operative,  and  rate  of  pay  in  effect 
February  15,  1918,  when  the  conditions  and  pay  became 

stable 60 

Post  Office  Department  Exhibit  No.  14. — Statement  of  the 
estimated  number  and  weights  of  shipments  handled  in 
otherwise  empty  storage  cars  without  additional  cost  during 
the  two-year  period  ending  October  31,  1918,  and  the  esti- 
mated cost  of  transportation  of  such  shipments  had  they 

been  handled  by  freight  or  express  as  theretofore 61 

Post  Office  Department  Exhibit  No.  15.— Statement  showing 
reduction  in  miles  of  service  in  cars  and  space  in  cars 
operated  in  the  carriage  of  mails  on  routes  stated  on  the 
space  basis,  as  shown  by  a  comparison  of  the  miles  of  service 
of  the  several  classes  of  units,  authorized  as  of  November  1, 
1916,  and  that  authorized  as  of  June  30,  1918,  after  the 
service  was  adjusted  to  the  space  system  as  provided  by  the 

act  of  July  28,  1916 61 

Post  Office  Department  Exhibit  No.  16.— Statement  showing 
the  computed  average  length  of  trip  for  the  several  units  of 
service  over  stated  railway  post-office  runs 62 


3 

Digest  of  Post  Office  Department  exhibits— Continued.  Page. 

Post  Office  Department  Exhibit  No.  17.— Statement  showing 
ton-mileage  and  pay  per  ton-mile  for  transportation  and 
railway  post-office  car  service  combined,  as  of  April  30,  1913, 
by  classes  of  routes ""^ 

Post  Office  Department  Exhibit  No.  18.— Circular  letter  No. 


316. 


64 


Post  Office  Department  Exhibit  No.  19.— Statement  showing 
cost  of  quadrennial  weighings  and  tabulations  in  each 
weighing  section,  1913-1916;  cost  of  weighing  on  weight 
basis  routes,  fourth  section,   1918;  and  cost  of  statistical 

weighing,  March  27  to  April  30,  1917 64 

Post  Office  Department  Exhibit  No.  20.— Floor  plan  for  stand- 
ard 30-foot  mail  apartment  car  for  narrow-gauge  railroads. . .  64 
Post  Office  Department  Exhibit  No.  21.— Statement  of  Charles 
H.  McBride,  now  superintendent  division  of  railway  mail 
pay  statistics,  and  superintendent  division  of  railway  ad- 
justments at  the  time  the  rule  followed  in  determining  the 

routes  to  be  placed  on  the  space  basis  was  made 65 

Post  Office  Department  Exhibit  No.  22.— Statement  of  Charles 
H.  McBride,  now  superintendent  di\-ision  of  railway  mail 
pay  statistics,  and  superintendent  di^^lsion  of  railway  ad- 
justments at  the  time  the  rulings  Nos.  10  and  11  were 

adopted ;  ■         ^^ 

Post  Office  Department  Exhibit  No.  23.— Statement  by  rail- 
road companies  or  systems  of  the  annual  miles  of  service  for 
the  several  units,  ^vith  the  annual  rates  of  pay  for  the  same, 
the  annual  rates  for  initial  and  terminal  allowances,  and 

total  annual  pay,  authorized  on  March  27,  1917 - .        66 

Post  Office  Department  Exhibit  No.  24.— Statement  of  rail- 
road mail  routes  stated  upon  space  basis  of  pay  March  27, 
1917;  authorized  annual  miles  of  service;  authorized  annual 
rates  of  line  pay,  and  initial  and  terminal  allowances,  and 
the  average  daily  weight  of  mails  carried  on  such  routes,  as 
shown  by  a  special  weighing  for  35  days,  March  27  to  April 

30,  1917,  inclusive ^'^ 

Post  Office  Department  Exhibit  No.  25.— Statement  of  full 
railway  post  office,  storage,  and  apartment  railway  post- 
office  cars  of  the  standard  size  and  of  cars  of  lesser  length 
accepted,  required  to  operate  the  service  authorized  as  of 

March  27,  1917 ^^ 

Post  Office  Department  Exhibit  No.  26.— Statement  showing, 
by  railroad  companies,  the  character  of  construction  of  full 
railway  post-office  cars  and  apartment  railway  post-office 
cars,  owned  and  operated  in  connection  with  railroad  mail 
service  as  of  March  27,  1917 68 


Digest  of  Post  Office  Department  exhibits — Continued.  Page. 

Post  Office  Department  Exhibit  No.  27. — Circular  letters  of 
instruction  and  forms 69 

Post  Office  Department  Exhibit  No.  28. — Consolidated  state- 
ment of  space  statistics  of  the  Atlantic  Coast  Line  Rail- 
road Co 69 

Post  Office  Department  Exhibit  No.  29. — Consolidated  state- 
ment of  space  statistics  of  the  Baltimore  &  Ohio  Railroad  Co.        69 

Post  Office  Department  Exhibit  No.  30. — Consolidated  state- 
ment of  space  statistics  of  the  Bangor  &  Aroostook  Railroad 
Co 69 

Post  Office  Department  Exhibit  No.  31. — Consolidated  state- 
ment of  space  statistics  of  the  Hocking  Valley  Railway  Co.        69 

Post  Office  Department  Exhibit  No.  32.- — Consolidated  state- 
ment of  space  statistics  of  the  Northern  Pacific  Railroad  Co.        69 

Post  Office  Department  Exhibit  No.  33.- — Consolidated  state- 
ment of  space  statistics  of  the  Oregon  Short  Line  Railroad  Co.        70 

Post  Office  Department  Exhibit  No.  34.- — Consolidated  state- 
ment of  space  statistics  of  the  San  Antonio  &  Aransas  Pass 
Railway  Co 70 

Post  Office  Department  Exhibit  No.  35. — Consolidated  state- 
ment of  space  statistics  of  the  Southern  Pacific  Co 70 

Post  Office  Department  Exhibit  No.  36.— Recapitulation  of 
R.  M.  P.  Form  No.  301,  consolidated  statement  of  track 
mileage,  train  mileage,  car-mileage,  and  car-foot  mileage,  by 
classes  of  service, 70 

Post  Office  ■■  Department  Exhibit  No.  37. — Statement  show- 
ing analysis  of  express  matter  carried  by  all  express  com- 
panies as  covered  by  waybills  dated  April  2,  6,  12,  17,  21, 
and25,  1917...... 71 

Post  Office  Department  Exhibit  No.  38. — Statement  of  annual 
rates  of  pay,  etc.,  on  former  weight-basis  railroad  mail  routes 
covered  by  routes  stated  upon  space  basis,  and  of  routes  con- 
tinued on  weight  basis,  and  of  rates  of  pay  allowable  on  basis 
of  weights  taken  during  statistical  period 72 

Post  Office  Department  Exhibit  No.  39. — Recapitulation  of 
form  R.  M.  P.  No.  1. — Statement  of  complete  operation  of 
trains  and  of  full  cars  therein  used  exclusively  for  passenger, 
miscellaneous,  and  express  services 73 

Post  Office  Department  Exhibit  No.  40. — Recapitulation  of 
form  R.  M.  P'.  No.  2. — Statement  of  complete  operation  of 
full  railway  post-office  cars  and  mail-storage  cars 74 

Post  Office  Department  Exhibit  No.  41.— Recapitulation  of 
form  R.  M.  P.  No.  3. — Statement  of  the  operation  of  mixed 
cars  (including  combination  cars  and  all  other  cars  carrying 
more  than  one  class  of  traffic)  and  the  division  of  the  space 
therein  to  the  passenger,  baggage,  miscellaneous,  express, 
and  authorized  mail  service,  and  unauthorized  and  unused 
apace 75 


Digest  of  Post  Office  Department  exhibits — Continued.  Paga. 

Post  Office  Department  Exhibit  No.  42.— Recapitulation  of  • 
form  R.  M.  P.  No.  4. — Statement  of  operation  of  railway 
post-office  apartments  in  combination  cars  and  of  mail-storage 
space,  closed-pouch  space,  and  imauthorized  and  unused 
space  in  mixed  cars 78 

Post  Office  Department  Exhibit  No.  43. — Consolidated  state- 
ment of  space  statistics  of  the  New  York,  New  Haven  & 
Hartford  Railroad  Co ■-         78 

Post  Office  Department  Exhibit  No.  44.— Addenda  to  Exhibits 
No3.  36,  39,  40,  41,  42 77 

Post  Office  Department  Exhibit  No.  45.— Statement  showing 
the  estimated  annual  compensation  at  the  space  basis  rates 
of  pay,  upon  the  railroad  mail  routes  continued  upon  the 
weight  basis  of  pay,  based  upon  the  service  performed  under 
the  weight  basis  of  pay,  during  the  statistical  period  March 
27  to  April  30,  1917,  inclusive 77 

Post  Office  Department  Exhibit  No.  46.— Statement  showing 
the  estimated  annual  rate  of  pay  that  would  have  accrued, 
based  upon  the  service  in  effect  on  March  27,  1917  (Post 
Office  Department  Exhibit  No.  5),  at  rates  for  line  pay  and 
initial  and  terminal  allowances  pro  rata  of  the  maximum 
rates  fixed  by  law  for  60-foot  full  railway  post-office  car  and 
storage  car  services 77 

Post  Office  Department  Exhibit  No.  47.— Classification  and 
description  of  the  character  of  the  unauthorized  and 
unused  space  reported  in  connection  with  the  mail  service 
on  R.  M.  P.  forms  Nos.  2  and  4 78 

Post  Office  Department  Exhibit  No.  48.— Statement  showing 
the  classification  of  excess,  unauthorized,  and  unused  space 
reported  by  the  railroad  companies  on  R.  M.  P.  forms  Nos. 
2  and  4,  as  having  been  operated  in  connection  with  the  mail 
8er^dce 82 

Post  Office  Department  Exhibit  No.  49. — Statement  showing 
estimated  average  density  of  loading  in  mail  servdce  com- 
pared with  estimated  average  density  of  loading  in  express 
service 82 

Post  Office  Department  Exhibit  No.  50. — Statement  showing 
the  average  load  per  linear  foot  carried  in  the  several  author- 
ized units  of  car  space  based  upon  return  of  the  special 

weighing,  week  of  April  12  to  18,  inclusive,  1917 83 

Post  Office  Department  Exhibit  No.  51.— Statement  sho^ving 
miles  of  service  authorized  in  the  several  units  of  service 
on  March  27,  1917  (Post  Office  Department  Exhibit  No.  5), 
equated  to  60-foot  car-miles 83 


Digest  of  Post  Office  Department  exhibits— Continued.  Page. 

Post  Office  Department  Kxhil)it  No.  52. — Statement  showing 
the  estimated  t(m-miles  performed  in  the  several  units  of 
authorized  space  in  effect  Marcli  27,  1917,  and  resultant 
rates  of  pay  per  ton  per  mile  based  on  authorized  annual 
rate  of  pay  ]\Iarch  27,  1917  (Post  Office  Department  Exhibit 
No.  5) 84 

Post  Office  Department  Exhil)it  No.  53. — Statement  showing 
for  the  month  of  April,  1917,  the  operation  of  mail  storage 
cars — outbound  trips  performed  and  allowed;  return  loaded 
and  empty  trips  performed  and  allowed;  and  return  empty 
trips  due  which  were  used  by  company  or  not  performed 
and  not  paid  for 85 

Post  Office  Department  Exhibit  No.  54. — Statement  of  the 
weight,  ton-miles,  mail  pay  per  annum  and  per  ton-mile 
of  shipments  of  periodical  second-class  mail  matter  in  fast- 
freight  trains  and  by  steamship,  for  the  fiscal  year  ended 
June  30,  1918 ." 85 

Post  Office  Department  Exhibit  No.  55. — Statement  showing, 
for  certain  selected  railroad  companies,  and  representing 
average  conditions,  the  maximum  and  minimum  number  of 
sacks  and  pouches  in  car  at  any  one  time,  carried  in  units 
of  storage  space  and  closed-pouch  space  during  the  week 
of  April  12  to  18,  inclusive,  1917,  as  reported  by  the  rail- 
road companies  on  R.  M.  P.  Form  No.  6 86 

Post  Office  Department  Exhibit  No.  56. — Statement  showing 
for  the  month  of  April,  1917,  the  total  pay  received  from 
railroad  companies  by  contractors  for  conveying  the  mails 
between  railroad  stations  and  post  offices,  and  transferring 
mails  between  railroad  stations;  and  by  railroad  employees, 
a  part  of  whose  time  was  occupied  in  the  handling  of  the 
mails  between  railroad  stations  and  post  offices  and  between 
railroad  stations,  as  reported  by  the  railroad  companies  on 
R.  M.  P.  Form  No.  5;  and  the  part  of  the  pay  of  such  em- 
ployees apportioned  to  the  mail  service 86 

Post  Office  Department  Exhibit  No.  57.— Statement  showing 
miles  of  travel  of  express  officials  and  employees,  joint  ex- 
press and  railroad  employees,  and  mail  officials  and  em- 
ployees, while  on  duty  and  performing  customary  services, 
and  while  occupying  seats  in  passenger  coaches  and  other 
passenger  cars,  as  reported  by  the  railroad  companies,  for 
the  mtmth  of  April,  1917 87 

Post  Office  Department  Exhibit  No.  58.— Copies  of  express 
contracts  between  various  railroads  and  the  express  com- 
panies         88 

Post  Office  Department  Exhibit  No.  59. — Statement  showing 
fines  imposed  on  railroads  during  the  fiscal  year  ended  June 
30, 1917,  on  account  of  loss  and  damage  to  mails  resulting  from 
wrecks,  fires,  depredations,  etc 88 


7 

Digest  of  Post  Office  Department  exhibits— Continued.  Page. 
Post  Office  Department  Exhibit  No.  60.— Statement  describ- 
ing the  several  classes  of  railroad  mail  service  in  postal  and 
baggage  cars;  the  character  and  furnishings  of  the  equip- 
ment used;  servdce  performed  by  postal  and  railroad  em- 
ployees in  connection  therewith,  etc 88 

Post  Office  Department  Exhibit  No.  61.— Statement  sho-sring 
the  result  of  tests  made  by  the  Railway  Mail  Service  to  deter- 
mine the  number  of  sacks  of  mail  that  could  be  piled  in 

certain  authorized  units  of  car  space,  etc 89 

Post  Office  Department  Exhibit  No.  62.— List  of  all  railroad 
mail  carriers  whose  reports  are  embraced  in  recapitulation  of 

R.  M.  P.  Forms  Nos.  70  and  71 89 

Post  Office  Department  Exhibit  No.  63.— List  of  railroad  mail 
carriers  embraced  in  recapitulation  for  Class  I  carriers  on 
R.  M.  P.  Foi-ms  Nos.  70  and  71.  This  list  includes  all  Class  I 
carriers  which  rendered  reports  on  R.  M.  P.  Forms  Nos.  1  to  4, 
inclusive,  and  Nos.  50  to  55,  inclusive,  in  such  a  manner  as  to 
permit  the  use  of  the  entire  statistics.  A  few  Class  II  and 
Class  III  carriers  are  included  in  combination  with  parent 

companies °" 

Post  Office  Department  Exhibit  No.  64.— Explanarion  of 
method  of  apportionment  of  car-miles  in  mixed  cars  (R.  M. 
P.  Form  No.  3)  to  the  passenger,  express,  and  mail  services, 
and  of  ascertainment  of  total  car-miles  in  each  class  of  ser^■ice  90 
Post  Office  Department  Exhibit  No.  65.— Explanation  of  the 
manner  of  assigning  and  apportioning  the  unauthorized  and 
unused  space  tabulated  on  R.  M.  P.  Form  No.  301,  to  the 

passenger,  express,  and  mail  ser\aces 90 

Post  Office  Department  Exhibit  No.  66.— Recapitulation  of 

R.  M.  P.  Forms  Nos.  70  and  71 90 

Post  Office  Department  Exhibit  No.  67.— Recapitulation  of 

R.  M.  P.  Forms  Nos.  70  and  71,  for  138  first-class  roads 91 

Post  Office  Department  Exhibit  No.  68.— Copies  of  statements 
on  R.  II.  P.  Forms  Nos.  70  and  71  for  262  first  and  second  class 

railroad  companies ^2 

Post  Office  Department  Exhibit  No.  69.— Table  showing  the 
results  of  the  application  to  the  ton-miles  of  mail  service  per- 
formed in  the  several  units  of  space  (Post  Office  Department 
Exhibit  No.  52),  of  the  ton-mile  rates  of  express  pay  to  the 
railroads  for  carrjdng  express  matter  (Post  Office  Department 
Exhibit  No.  37);  combinations  of  various  results  on  basis  of 
carload  and  less-than-carload  rates  for  first  and  second  classes 
and  average  for  all  classes  of  express;  and  these  results 
equated  on  the  basis  of  the  density  of  the  load  (Post  Office 
Department  Exhibit  No.  49)  and  the  cost  per  car-mile,  mail 
and  express  (Post  Office  Department  Exhibit  No.  66) 93 


8 

Digest  of  Post  Office  Department  exhibits— Continued.  Page. 
Post  Office  Department  Exhibit  No.  70.— Graphic  chart  show- 
ing the  differences  resulting  from  the  department's  methods 
of  ascertaining  the  car-foot  miles  of  the  several  classes  of 
service  and  of  the  distribution  of  operating  revenues,  ex- 
penses, and  net  income  under  plans  Nos.  1  and  2 93 

Post  Office  Department  Exhibit  No.  71.— Copy  of  circular  let- 
ter from  the  Second  Assistant  Postmaster  General,  dated 
November  2,  1916,  and  distributed  to  the  several  carriers  at 
that  time,  referring  to  certain  statements  in  circular  letter  of 
the  committee  on  railway  mail  pay  of  the  railroads,  dated 
October  17,  1916,  and  stating  the  department's  position  on 
the  subjects  treated  in  the  circular  letter  of  the  railway  mail 
pay  committee  and  the  requirements  of  the  law  relative 
thereto ^^ 

Post  Office  Department  Exhibit  No.  72.— Copy  of  circular  let- 
ter of  the  Second  Assistant  Postmaster  General,  reproducing 
certain  instructions  issued  by  him  under  dates  of  November 
2,  1914,  November  7,  1916,  and  November  22,  1916,  relative 
to  the  shipment  of  merchandise  to  be  hauled  on  a  star  route .        94 

Post  Office  Department  Exhibit  No.  73.— Statement  showing 
number  of  carload  shipments  during  the  fiscal  year  1918,  of 
stamped  envelopes  and  newspaper  wrappers  from  Dayton, 
Ohio,  to  the  points  named 94 

Post  Office  Department  Exhibit  No.  74.— Statement  compar- 
ing the  revenues  shown  in  recapitulation  of  R.  M.  P.  Form 
No.  71  (Post  Office  Department  Exhibit  No.  66)  with  invest- 
ment in  road  and  equipment 94 

Post  Office  Department  Exhibit  No.  75.— Comparison  of  pas- 
senger, express,  and  mail  service  car-miles,  revenues,  ex- 
penses, and  taxes,  and  other  expenditures,  and  net  income, 
with  return  on  investment,  compiled  from  Post  Office  De- 
partment Exhibit  No.  66,  representing  the  month  of  April, 


1917. 


94 


Post  Office  Department  Exhibit  No.  76.— Post  Oflice  Depart- 
ment's plan  for  railway  mail  pay 95 

Post  Office  Department  Exhibit  No.  77.— Sample  weight  card.        97 

Post  Office  Department  Exhibit  No.  78.— Sample  weight 
circular ^' 

Post  Office  Department  Exhibit  No.  79.— Letter  of  the  post- 
master general  to  Hon.  James  T.  Lloyd,  dated  March  28, 1914        97 

Post  Office  Department  Exhibit  No.  80.— Letter  of  the  post- 
master general  to  Hon.  James  T.  Lloyd,  dated  May  8,  1914, 
in  further  reference  to  the  bill  introduced  by  Mr.  Lloyd ...         98 


9 

Digest  op  Post  Office  Department  exhibits — Continued.  Page. 
Post  Office  Department  Exhibit  No.  81. ^Statement  showing 
the  estimated  and  apportioned  expense  (including  the 
directly  allocated  expense)  for  the  mails,  and  net  income 
at  the  same  rate  per  car-mile  as  the  railroads  derive  from 
the  carriage  of  the  express  based  upon  like  estimates  and 
apportionments.  On  this  basis  a  uniform  rate  is  deduced 
which  is  applied  to  the  authorizations  as  of  March  27,  1917, 
and  the  results  are  shown  in  Part  II 98 

Post  Office  Department  Exhibit  No.  82.— Statement  showing 
for  mail  routes  stated  upon  the  space  basis,  the  estimated 
railroad  mail  pay  per  annum  as  of  March  27,  1917,  based 
upon  the  authorized  miles  of  ser^ice  (Post  Office  Depart- 
ment Exhibit  No.  5)  and  the  rates  proposed  to  be  paid  as 
stated  in  Railroad  Companies'  Exhibit  No.  57,  exclusive  of 
New  England  differential 100 

Post  Office  Department  Exhibit  No.  83.— Western  Pacific 
Railroad  Co.— Grapliic  chart  showing  the  character  of  the 
unauthorized  space  claims  made  in  connection  with  the 
operation  of  apartment  railway  post-office  cars 101 

Post  Office  Department  Exhibit  No.  84.— Great  Northern 
Railway  Co.— Two  grapliic  charts  showing  claims  for  excess, 
unauthorized  and  unused  space  claimed  in  connection  with 
the  operation  of  authorized  mail  space 101 

Post  Office  Department  Exhibit  No.  85.— Great  Northern 
Railway  Co. — GrapMc  chart  showing  claims  by  the  company 
for  movement  of  unauthorized  and  excess  space  in  con- 
nection with  authorized  operation  of  m.ail  ser\T.ce 101 

Post  Office  Department  Exhibit  No.  86.— Pennsylvania  Co.— 
Graphic  chart  sho\\ing  claims  for  unauthorized  movement  of 
space  in  connection  with  the  authorized  operation  of  closed- 
pouch  units 102 

Post  Office  Department  Exhibit  No.  87. — Pennsylvania  Co. — 
Graphic  chart  shoAving  the  claims  for  unauthorized  space 
made  by  the  Pennsylvania  Co.  in  connection  with  the 
operation  of  closed-pouch  units 102 

Post  Office  Department  Exhibit  No.  88.— Northern  Pacific 
Railway  Co. — Grapliic  chart  showing  claims  made  by 
Northern  Pacific  Railway  Co.  for  operation  of  unauthorized 
and  unused  space  in  connection  with  authorized  mail 
operation 102 

Post  Office  Department  Exhibit  No.  89.— Memorandum 
relative  to  convertible  cars 102 


10 

Page. 

Abstract  or  evidence— Ohal  tkstimony 103 

Administration 103 

General 103 

.Sjmce-basis  administration  satisfactory  from  an  oper- 
ating: standpoint 103 

Space  bavsis  administered  fairly  and  in  keeping  with 
the  s])irit  of  the  plan  and  uniformly  over  the 
country 103 

Relations  between  the  railroad  companies  and  officers 
of  the  Postal  Service  generally  cooperative 104 

General  administrative  policy  determined  in  the  Post 

Office  Department 104 

Administrative  r-hanges  by  different  officials  will  not 

be  so  marked  as  to  injure  railroads 105 

Some  modifications  in  administration  of  space  basis 
would  remove  objections 105 

Some  changes  in  administration  could  be  made  with 
benefit  to  the  Post  Office  Department  and  the 
railroads 105 

Companies  might  be  relieved  under  certain  condi- 
tions of  difficult  situations  arising  from  authoriza- 
tions changing  en  route 106 

Method  of  handling  emergency  space  authorizations 

could  be  simplified 106 

Comparative  administrative   cost   of  weight  and   space 

systems 107 

Comparative  cost  of  administration  under  weight  and 

space  bases 107 

Authorization  of  service  and  adaptation  of  operation  thereto. 

General Ill 

Si^ace  authorizations  must  be  controlled  ])y  Post  Office 
Department Ill 

Regular  authorizations 112 

Operating  conditions  govern  recommendations  for 
authorizations 114 

Changes  of  units  are  made  only  at  divisional  points. .       115 

Divisional  points;  Department  does  not  dictate  to 
railroads  concerning  the  operation  of  trains 116 

When  the  railroad  makes  the  change  of  unit  there  is 
compensation  for  the  change 118 

Terminal  allowance  is  made  whenever  the  car  unit  is 
changed 118 

Operation  of  cars  in  fulfillment  of  authorizations  and 

cooperation  between  railroads  and  Department 118 

Destination  loads  in  several  cars  run  l)y  the  railroad 
in  lieu  of  one  load  in  one  car 119 

Operation  of  cars  under  the  space  system  the  same  as 
under  the  weight  system 120 


11 

Abstract  of  evidexce — Oral  testimo^^y — Continued. 

Authorization  of  service  and  adaptation  of  operation  thereto — Con. 
General — Continued.  Page. 

Ascertainment  of  facts  as  to  service   needed   and 
weights  carried  made  largely  by  clerks  in  the  field 

under  either  basis 122 

The  railroads  do  not  reserve  or  hold  exclusively  for 
the  mails  space  authorized  for  mails  in  baggage 

cars 123 

Operation  of  cars  through  under  reduced  authoriza- 
tions not  tji^ical  in  territory  west  of  Missouri  River.  124 
Reductions  in  authorized  space  under  the  space  sys- 
tem have  been  the  result  of  discontinuance  of  train 
ser\'ice  and  of  the  consolidations  of  loads.  The 
consequent  release  of  railroad  equipment  has  met 

mth  the  railroads'  approval 124 

Railway  post-office  cars 125 

Manner  of  making  authorizations  for  space  units 125 

Permanent  authorizations  to  su])ersede  emergency 

authorizations 127 

Relative  importance  of  service  performed  in  full 
railway    post-office    cars   and    apartment    railway 

post-office  cars 127 

Distributing  unit  changed  to  next  higher  unit  only 
when   additional  storage    space    needed    in    both 

directions 128 

Xumber  of  authorizations  in  full  railway  post-office 

cars  and  apartment  cars  reduced  en  route 130 

Storage  cars 130 

Pay  for  distribution  and  storage-car  units  based  upon 

the  round  trip  of  cars 130 

Empty  return   movement  of  storage  cars  paid   for 

unless  cars  used  bj-  company 131 

Changes  in  railway  post  office  or    storage-car  units 

between  terminals 132 

Closed-pouch  and  storage  s})ace 132 

Entirely  practicable  to  handle  closed-pouch  mails  in 

the  units  authorized  by  the  Department 132 

Storage  space  authorizations  generally  carried  in 
excess  space  in  oversize  cars  when  such  cars  are 

oijerated 134 

T\Tien  Department  authorizes  mails  to  be  carried  in 

excess  space,  it  pays  for  the  units  in  that  space 135 

Apartment-car  service  superseded  bj^  closed-pouch 
service  only  after  thorough  investigation  and 
complete  arrangements  to  provide  mail  ser\-ice; 
such  changes  not  to  the  detriment  of  the  service.       135 


12 

Abstract  of  evidence — Oral  testimony — Continued. 

Authorization  of  service  and  adaptation  of  operation  thereto— Con. 
Closed  pouch  and  storage  space— Continued.  Page. 

Practice  of  discontinuing  a[)artment  cars  and  sub- 
stituting closed-pouch  space  not  peculiar  to  the 

space  basis 136 

Combination  of  units  in  authorizing  storage  space 
in  regular  service  not  a  desirable  modification  of 

system 1^" 

Emergency  space 137 

Emergency  authorizations  and  payments  described . .       137 

The  authorization  of  emergency  space  units 139 

Where  emergency  mails  must  he  dispatched  and  there 
is  no  room  in  the  consist  of  the  train,  a  full  car  is 

ordered  and  paid  for 141 

Substitution  of  regular  for  emergency  authorization 

when  latter  is  needed  20  or  more  times  a  month..      141 
Advantages  to  Department  and  railroads  in  placing 

emergency  service  on  regular  basis 142 

Percentage  of  emergency  space  to  entire  authorized 

space 143 

Rule  for   combining  units  of  space  in  emergency 

service  does  not  apply  to  regular  service 144 

The  distinction  between  regular  and  emergency 
service  lies  in  the  fact  that  the  latter  is  expected 
to  be  furnished  only  when  there  is  space  available 
in  regular  consist  of  train  and  the  authorization  is 
terminated  when  the  need  for  the  space  ceases, 
the  vacated  space  being  then  available  for  com- 
pany purposes -  -       144 

Under  the  space  basis  railroads  are  required  to  pro\'ide 
space  for  the  regular  authorizations,  but  space  for 
emergency  authorizations  less  than  full  cars  is 
required  only  when  they  may  be  accommodated 

in  the  regular  consist  of  the  train 146 

The  solicitor  for  the  Post  Office  Department  has 
ruled  that  more  than  one  unit  of  space  may  be 

authorized 14' 

Justification  for  authorization  of  emergency  units  on 

the  plan  followed  by  the  Department 147 

Authorizations  are  made  only  for  the  distance  mails 

are  required  to  be  carried 148 

Count  of  sacks  and  practicable  alternative 148 

Count  of  sacks 148 

It  is  entirely  practicable  for  railroads  to  set  aside  cer- 
tain space  in  baggage  cars  for  the  mails  if  they  chose 

so  to  do  and  discontinue  all  counts  of  sacks 149 

Practicable  to  measure  space  units  in  baggage  cars  by 
use  of  movable  stanchions 151 


13 

Abstract  of  Evidence— Oral  testimony— Continued. 

Authorization  of  service  and  adaptation  of  operation  thereto — Con. 
Count  of  sacks  and  practical  operation— Continued.  Page. 

Desirability  and  practicability  of  eliminating  count 

of  sacks  in  determination  of  space  units 152 

Count  of  sacks  in  small  units  must  be  continued  unless 

the  cars  are  stanchioned 152 

Troubles  in  connection  with  count  of  mail  sacks 
greatly  magnified;  count  could  be  eliminated  and 

space  basis  continue 152 

Disputes  over  count  of  sacks  not  a  serious  matter 153 

Differences  in  emergency  space  claims  of  railroads 
and  allowances  as  made  by  Department  due  to 

difference  in  method  of  ascertainment 153 

Baggagemen  on  Missouri  Pacific  Lines  are  not  ac- 
quainted with  the  rules  governing  the  space  basis 
and  do  not  Icnow  what  the  authorizations  are  in  the 

trains 154 

If  the  Commission  found  that  it  was  proper  to  measure 
the  space,  it  would  probably  eliminate  all  contro- 
versy       154 

Cars  for  railway  post-office  purposes 155 

Same  under  weight  and  space  system 155 

The  railroads  operated  the  mail  cars  under  the  space- 
basis  system  the  same  as  they  did  under  the  weight- 
basis  system 155 

The  railroads  operated  oversize  cars  under  weight- 
basis  system 156 

Oversize  and  undersize  cars  in  use  when  space-basis 
system  went  into  effect  were  the  same  cars  used 

under  weight-basis  system 160 

Under  weight-basis  system  railroads  built  oversize 
cars  and  operated  them  on  lines  where  needs  of 

service  did  not  require  them 160 

Cars  in  use  when  space-basis  system  was  inaugurated 
were  the  same  as  used  under  the  weight-basis  sys- 
tem, and  railroads  have  not  made  changes  therein 

except  when  shopped 161 

Apartment  and  full  postal  cars  under  space-basis  sys- 
tem same  as  in  use  under  weight-basis  system 162 

Cars  built  by  companies  under  the  weight-basis  system 
beyond  the  needs  expressed  by  the  Department  at 

that  time 162 

The  railroads  have  generally  built  30-foot  apartment 

and  60-foot  railway  post-oflice  cars 163 

Varying  sizes  of  railway  post-office  cars  on  the  Balti- 
more &  Ohio  Railroad 163 


14 

Abstract  op  Evidence — Oral  testimony — Continued. 

Cars  for  railway  post-office  purposes — Continued.  Page. 

Oversize  cars  a  disadvantage  to  the  mail  service;  excess 
not  used  for  distribution  purposes 164 

Oversize  cars  seriously  hamper  work  of  clerks  and 
retard  distributioii  of  mails 164 

Excess  distributing  facilities  in  oversize  cars  not  used 

by  postal  clerks 164 

Excess  space  in  oversize  cars  used  more  adAantageously 
for  railroads  under  the  space-basis  system  than  under 
weight-basis  system 165 

Excess  space  in  oversize  cars  under  weight-basis 
system  not  used  to  advantage  of  railroads  or  Depart- 
ment        165 

Excess  space  in  oversize  cars  under  space-basis  sys- 
tem used  to  mutual  advantage  of  railroads  and 
Department  to  handle  mails  formerly  handled  in 

baggage  cars 165 

Railroads  should  standardize  postal  cars;  convertible  cars .       166 

Companies  should  meet  problem  of  oversize  cars  by 
standardizing  their  equipment 166 

Railroads  should  remodel  oversize  and  undersize  cars 
to  fit  conditions  when  permanent  plan  of  pay- 
ment is  decided 167 

Railroads  would  find  it  to  their  advantage  to  operate 

oversize  cars  for  their  own  piu-poses 168 

Specific  advantages  of  the  space-basis  system 169 

Provides  a  certain  manner  of  determining  compen- 
sation; better  control  of  dispatches  of  mail;  elim- 
inates expense  of  weighings  and  tabulations;  gives 
better  and  closer  supervision  and  conserves  car 
equipment 169 

Mails  are  required  to  be  carried  in  the  limit  of  space 
authorized  under  the  space-basis  system 170 

Greater  facility  of  adjusting  requirements  of  service 
to  the  needs  of  the  Postal  Service  under  space  than 
under  the  weight- basis  system 170 

Benefits  of  service  may  be  measured  by  the  cost  to  the 
Department  of  the  ser\dce  required 171 

Tendency  under  weight- basis  system,  which  does  not 
exist  under  space-basis  system,  to  authorize  service 
where  and  when  cost  of  same  to  carrier  was  not  con- 
sidered or  facilities  were  imnecessary,  resulting  in 
uneconomical  operation 172 

Only  such  service  as  is  specifically  authorized  is  re- 
quired of  railroads  under  space-basis  system 173 


15 

Abstract  of  evidence— oral  testimony — Continued. 

Specific  advantages  of  the  space-basis  system — Continued.        Page. 

Under  the  space-basis  system,  as  distinguished  from 
the  weight-basis  system,  the  Department  gives  and 
the  railroads  receive  pay  for  the  actual  ser\Tlce 
rendered 174 

Space-basis  system  pays  railroads  for  all  service  per- 
formed by  them I75 

Space-basis  system  satisfactorily  compensated  rail- 
roads for  carriage  of  unusual  mails  resulting  from 
wai'  conditions 176 

Under  weight-basis  system  no  consideration  given  to 
fluctuation  in  the  mails  which  is  represented  on 
space-basis  system  by  emergency  service  units ....       176 

Saving  in  car  space  under  space-basis  system 177 

All  essential  distribution  en  route  is  being  made  under 
space-basis  system 178 

Greater  incentive  to  railroad  to  furnish  cars  under  the 
space-basis  system 179 

Space  basis  preferable  from  an  administrative  point 
of  view ;  pays  for  all  service  rendered.  There  is  no 
recognition  of  frequency  of  service  under  weight 
basis 180 

Additional  ser\dce  performed  without  additional  com- 
pensation, under  the  weight-basis  system 181 

The  space-basis  system  is  responsive  to  increase  in 
weight  carried 181 

More  storage  mails  handled  in  mail  cars  under  space- 
basis  system  than  under  weight-basis  system,  oper- 
ating to  relieve  railroad  employees  of  mail  handling.       183 

The  space  system,  as  distinguished  from  the  weight 
system,  has  had  a  tendency  to  consolidate  loads  and 
effect  economies  in  the  operation  of  full  storajp 
cars 184 

Post-office  supplies  and  empty  equipment,  which 
under  weight-basis  system  were  carried  in  freight 
rars,  are  under  the  space-basis  system,  carried  in 
return  movements  of  otherwise  empty  mail  cars, 
releasing  railroad  equipment  and  saving  expense. .       185 

The  carriage  of  empty  mail  equipment  in  the  return 
empty  mail  cars  under  the  space-basis  system  re- 
turns the  equipment  to  use  sooner  than  was  possible 
under  the  weight-basis  system  practice  of  handling .       186 

Under  the  space-basis  system  blue-tag  mails  which 
theretofore  went  by  freight  are  carried  in  mail  cars 
and  the  freight-car  space  turned  back  to  the  rail- 
roads        186 


16 

Abstract  op  evidence — Oral  testimony — Continued. 

Specific  advantages  of  the  space-basis  system — Continued.         Page. 

The  close  supervision  over  space  under  the  weight- 
basis  system  applied  only  to  the  full  railway  post- 
office  cars;  under  the  space-basis  system  it  is  ex- 
tended to  all  classes  of  units 187 

Closer  supervision  and  release  of  equipment  under 
the  space-basis  system 188 

Space  basis  results  in  economy  in  car  equipment 188 

The  relation  between  the  development  of  the  termi- 
nal railway  post  offices  and  the  economical  use  of 
train-space  and  economies  in  the  railway  mail 
service 189 

Under  space-basis  system  the  railroads  have  an  in- 
centive to  make  and  maintain  good  mail  train 
schedules 190 

Closer  supervision  by  the  railway  mail  ser\dce  under 
space-basis  system,  and  beneficial  effects  on 
personnel 191 

Under  space-basis  system  postal  clerks  take  greater 
interest  in  economizing  space 192 

The  space-basis  system  has  reduced  the  necessity  for 
the  number  of  railway  post-office  clerks  on  the 
lines  which  would  otherwise  be  required  under  the 
weight-basis  system 192 

Cost  of  supervision  less  under  space-basis  system  than 
weighing  under  weight-basis  system 193 

The  space-basis  system  has  eliminated  considerable 
cost  incident  to  the  weighing  of  the  mails 193 

Consolidation  of  dispatches  by  trains  has  reduced  the 
number  of  trips  between  railroad  stations  and  post 

offices 194 

'♦        Standardization  of  car  units  under  the  space-basis 

system,  and  its  advantages 194 

Cooi^eration  of  railroads  with  Department  in  affect- 
ing readjustments  of  service  better  under  space- 
basis  system  than  under  weight-basis  system 195 

Mail  cars  are  released  immediately  after  reaching 
termini;  there  is  nothing  in  the  mail  service  analo- 
gous to  the  warehouse  or  reconsignment  privileges; 
there  is  no  shortage  of  cars  as  a  result  of  inade- 
quate terminal  facilities 196 

There  have  been  no  complaints  from  the  public  as  to 
changes  in  service  under  space-l)asis  system  except 
a  few  where  closed-pouch  service  has  superseded 
apartment-car  service 197 


17 

Abstract  of  evidence — Oral  testimony — Continued.  Page. 

Space-basis  system  practicable  and  equitable 198 

Space-basis  system,  with  such  modifications  as  the 
commission  may  decide  upon,  a  most  equital:)le 
and  fair  means  of  compensating  the  companies, 
and  fair  to  the  Department 198 

Post  Office  Department  should  administer  the  Postal 
Ser^•ice.  and  if  a  common  basis  of  operation  should 
be  determined  upon  by  the  Interstate  Commerce 
Commission  the  Department  and  the  railroads 
would  be  in  accord 199 

If  space  basis  could  be  made  a  fair  measure  of  value, 

the  chief  objection  would  be  removed 200 

Space-basis  system  satisfactory 201 

The  space-basis  system  has  operated  entkely  satis- 
factorily to  the  Government  and  more  satisfac- 
torily than  the  weight-basis  system 201 

railroads  have  no  particular  kick  under  space-basis 
system  as  distinguished  from  weight-basis  system. .       201 

No  evidence  that  the  railroads'  prediction  has  been 
verified  that  large  amount  of  express  and  freight 
would  be  diverted  from  the  roads  as  a  result  of  the 

space-basis  system 202 

Operation  of  service  substantially  the  same  on  November  1, 
1916,  under  space-basis  system  as  theretofore  under  weight- 
basis  system;  and  readjustment  thereafter  was  made  as  soou 
as  definite  measure  of  ser\-ice  was  ascertained 203 

Space  authorizations  on  November  1.  1916,  far  in 
excess  of  needs  of  eer\-ice  and  subsequent  reduc- 
tions were  made  as  soon  as  definite  measure  of  ser- 
vice was  secured 203 

Operation  of  service  substantially  the  same  on  No- 
vember 1,  1916,  under  the  space-basis  system  as 
it  was  on  October  31,  1916,  under  the  weight-basis 
system,  and  subsequent  changes  were  made  to  ad- 
just the  authorizations  to  the  needs  of  the  service. .       204 

Reductions  in  authorizations  made  by  Department 
in  order  to  adjust  the  space  to  the  needs  of  the 

8er\dce 204 

Payments  under  space-basis  system 205 

Method  of  making  pajTiients  under  the  space-basis 
system 205 

Evidence    of   performance    of    service    by    railroad 


companies . 


208 


Ninety  per  cent  of  the  pay  under  space-basis  system 
is  for  the  movement  of  cars  where  there  is  payment 

for  such  in  both  directions 209 

122698—19 2 


18 

Abstract  of  evidence — Oral  testimony — Continued. 

Payment  under  space  basis  system — Continued.  Page. 

Fifty  per  cent  of  emorgoncy  space  is  paid  for  in  both 
directions 209 

Some  parallel  between  wei.c:ht-basis  system  and  space- 
basis  system,  so  far  as  method  is  concerned 209 

Effort  of  Department  to  pay  for  emergency  mails  has 
gone  beyond  any  effort  to  compensate  on  weight 

basis  for  fluctuations  in  mails 209 

Some  features  of  railroads'  performance  of  mail  service 210 

Handling  of  mails  at  night  at  local  railroad  stations. .       210 

Night  exchanges  of  mail  not  made  where  it  is  prac- 
ticable to  carry  them  by  and  return  by  morning 
trains 213 

Night  exchanges  of  mail  comparatively  infrequent. .       213 

The  cooperation  of  the  Department  with  the  railroads 
in  relieving  them  of  labor  and  expense  in  the  de- 
livery of  mails  when  the  trains  pass  at  night 214 

Piling  mail  in  closed-pouch  units  and  distributing 
cars 215 

Maximum  load  in  closed-pouch  units  is  at  the 
initial  terminal 216 

Stopping  of  trains  for  parcel  post 216 

Representations  to  Congress  regarding  pay 217 

Representations  before  the  passage  of  the  act  of  1916 
that  the  effect  of  the  statute  would  be  to  increase 
the  aggregate  pay  of  the  railroads  was  based  upon 
the  application  of  the  unit  rates  without  allowing 
for  economical  readjustment  of  service 217 

The  increase  in  railroad  mail  pay  represented  to  Con- 
gress as  a  result  of  the  space-basis  legislation 217 

Land -grant  provision 218 

Land-grant  provision  of  law 218 

Fast-mail  trains 219 

When  preference  is  given  mails  on  fast-mail  trains 219 

Railroad  mail  service  considered  desirable  by  the  railroads. .       220 

The  railroads  have  regarded  the  establishment  and 
maintenance  of  mail  service  on  their  lines  as  de- 
sirable         220 

General  attitude  of  railroads  toward  establishment  of 

new  mail  service 220 

Service  requirements  and  conditions 221 

Railway  post-office  car  service 221 

Full  railway  post-office  car  service  described 221 

Apartment  railway  post-office  car  service  described . .       222 

Character  of  service  performed  in  full  railway  post- 
office  and  apartment  railway  post-office  cars 222 


-Abstract  of  evidence — Oral  testimony — Continued. 

Service  requirements  and  conditions — Continued.  Page. 

Storage  car  and  storage-space  service 228 

Stoi'age  car  service  described 228 

Practice  with  reference  to  loading  and  unloading 
mails  in  storage  cars 230 

Requirements  of  railroads  as  to  loading  storage  cars 
same  under  space-basis  system  as  under  weight-basis 
system,  but  cars  are  now  loaded  to  as  near  capacity 
as  possible 230 

Transferring  mail  from  car  to  car  en  route 231 

Storage-space  ser^dce  described 231 

The  manner  of  piling  mail  in  baggage  cars 236 

Separation  of  mails  loaded  in  storage  cars  and  storage 

space  by  railroad  employees 237 

No  greater  knowledge  requii-ed  of  baggagemen  to  han- 
dle mails  than  to  handle  express 240 

Mails  in  storage-space  units  handled  by  railway  em- 
ployees, as  a  rule 240 

Bulk  of  mail  handled  in  60-foot  storage  cars  where 

there  is  no  oversize 241 

Closed-pouch  service 241 

Closed-pouch  service  described 241 

Duties  of  baggagemen  in  handling  closed-pouch  mails 
same  under  weight-basis  system  as  under  space-basis 
system 243 

The  work  required  of  baggagemen  in  handling  mails  is 
not  complicated  nor  does  it  require  expert  knowl- 
edge. They  are  often  assisted  by  the  railway  postal 
clerks 244 

Policy  of  Department  to  give  every  assistance  to 
baggagemen  handling  the  mails 245 

Mail  handling  by  baggagemen  requires  no  greater 

knowledge  than  the  handling  of  express 245 

The  railroads  handle  the  closed  pouches  in  the  baggage 
cars  in  much  the  same  mariner  as  they  handle  bag- 
gage and  express 246 

Closed-pouch  service  not  a  distribution  service 247 

Mails  in  closed-pouch  units  handled  exclusively  by 
railroad  employees 247 

Distinction  l)etween  storage-space  units  and  closed- 
pouch  units  of  3  feet  and  7  feet 247 

•Character  of  mails  carried 248 

Classes  and  character  of  mails  distributed  and  carried 
in  the  several  units 248 

Xine-tenths  of  parcel  post  carried  in  regular  authoriza- 
tions and  no  count  of  sacks  or  pieces  involved 251 


20 

AusTRACT  OF  EVIDENCE — Oral  TESTIMONY — Continued. 

Service  requirements  and  conditions — Continued.  Pago. 

Transfer  clerks  supervise  dispatch  of  mails 252" 

The  Department  maintains  clerks  at  the  railway 
post-office  terminals  to  distribute  the  mails,  and  the 
railway-mail  transfer  clerks  supervise  the  dispatch 

of  mails  by  the  trains 252' 

Loading  and  unloading  of  mails 253 

General  practice  with  respect  to  loading  and  unloading 
of  mails 253 

Railway  postal  clerks  perform  much  of  the  work  of 
loading  mails  into  cars  and  much  of  the  work  of 

unloading  them  from  cars 254 

Side  and  terminal  messenger  service 255 

Differences  between  screen-wagon  and  mail-messenger 
service  explained ;  both  relieve  railroads  of  handling 
mails  between  stations  and  post  offices 255- 

Ninety  per  cent  of  the  volume  of  mail  is  handled 

by  Department  mail  messengers 256 

The  rule  of  the  Department  governing  closing  hours  for 
mails  for  trains,  day  and  night 258 

The  provisions  of  law  and  regulation  regarding  the 
closing  of  the  mails  at  post  offices 260 

No  complaints  from  railroads  relative  to  carrying 
mails  by  stations  for  return  on  another  train;  same 
practice  obtained  under  weight-basis  system 261 

Practice  of  Department  to  relieve  independently 
owned  companies  of  burdensome  terminal  messenger 
service 261 

Compensating  the  companies  for  performance  of  side 
ser\-ice 262 

If  side  and  terrriinal  service  was  taken  out  of  the  field 
of  transportation  and  paid  for  specifically  it  would 
remove  that  cause  for  irritation 262 

Discussion  of  the  question  of  pay  to  railroads  for  per- 
forming side  and  terminal  messenger  service 263 

Distinction  between  side  and  terminal  ser\'ice  and  initial 
and  terminal  allowance 264 

Terminology  of  side  and  terminal  service  and  initial 

and  terminal  allowances  distinguished 264 

Terminal  railway  post  offices 265 

Railway  post  office  terminals  are  not  numerous,  and 
are  placed  at  points  allowing  most  economical  hand- 
ling of  mails 265 


21 

Abstract  of  evidence — Oral  testimony — Continued.  page. 

Space  statistics 266 

Instructions  concerning  reports  of  certain  operations  of 
space 266 

Joint  instructions  of  Department  and  railway  mail 
pay  committee  to  secure  uniform  reports  and  not 
binding  as  to  treatment  of  results 266 

Instructions  under  which  the  railroads  reported  space.      266 

Railroads  insisted  on  excess,  unauthorized,  and  un- 
used space  claims  being  reported  in  the  manner 
prescribed  by  the  instructions  acquiesced  in  by  the 
Post  Office  Department  for  statistical  purposes  only.       267 

Instructions  of  Railway  Mail  Pay  Committee  outUned 
method  of  reporting  information,  leaving  conclusions 

to  be  worked  out  by  each  side 268 

Authorizations  of  space  a  better  giude  to  space  used  than 
measurements  by  railroad  employees 269 

The  Department  felt  that  it  should  not  be  dependent 
on  opinions  of  railroad  employees  in  the  cars  for 
measurement  of  mail  space  when  the  authorization 
was  a  guide 269 

Controversy  as  to  unused  and  unauthorized  space 
would  have  remained,  if  actual  space  used  by  mails 
had  been  reported 270 

Controversy  would  not  have  been  eliminated  if  actual 
space  had  been  reported  in  the  mail  service,  as 
raihoads  would  still  have  claimed  the  unauthorized 

and  unused  space 270 

The  space  was  fully  measured  by  the  authorizations 272 

Mail  authorizations  fully  measured  the  space  occu- 
pied by  the  mails  and  was  liberal 272 

Excessive  claims  made  by  the  railroads  chargeable  to  the 
mails  in  their  reports  of  space  operated 273 

Sixty-foot  railway  post-office  car  service 273 

(a)  The  railroads  charged  to  the  mails  all  excess  over 

authorization  of  60-foot  railway  post-office  cars, 

in  the  same  manner  as  in  other  car  cases 273 

(b)  The  railroads  charged  to  tlie  mails  the  excess  space 

in  70-foot  cars  on  60-foot  authorizations 280 

(c)  The  railroad's  claim  of  operation  of  unauthorized 

space  in  connection  with  railway  post-office  car 
service  over  mileage  not  authorized.  Chicago, 
Rock  Island  &  Gulf  Railway 282 

(d)  Unauthorized  space  claims  in  connection  with 

operation  on  days  not  authorized  of  full  railway 
post-office  cars,  New  York,  New  "Haven  &  Hart- 
ford Railroad 283 

(«)  If  no  mails  at  all  were  carried  on  a  particular  line, 
company  would  still  have  to  operate  a  60-foot 
baggage  car 283 


22 

Abstract  of  evidence — Oral  testimony — Continued. 
Space  statistics— Continued. 

Excessive  claims  made  by  the  railroads,  etc. — Con.  Page. 

Apartment-car  service -  -       284 

(o)  The  railroads  charged  to  the  mails  all  excess  over 
authorization  of  30-foot  apartments  in  cars,  in 
the  same  manner  as  in  other  cases 284 

(b)  The  operation  of  the  cars  to  fulfill  the  apartment- 

car  aiithorizations  was  the  same  under  the 
weight-basis  system 285 

(c)  Railroad's  claim  for  unused  apartment-car  space 

operation  over  mileage  not  authorized,  Western 
Pacific  Railroad.  (Post  Office  Department  Ex- 
hibit 83) 285 

(d)  The  railroads'  claim  for  unused   apartment-car 

space  operation  over  nonmail  mileage,  New 
York,  Chicago  &  St.  Louis  Railway 286 

(e)  Excessive    space    claims    in    connection    with 

apartment-car  authorization,  Chicago  &  North 

Western  Railway 288 

Sixty-foot  storage-car  service 289 

(a)  The  railroads  charged  to  the  mails  all  unauthor- 

ized and  unused  space  reported  in  connection 
with  the  GO-foot  storage  cars 289 

(b)  Unauthorized  space  claims  for  one  round  trip  in 

connection  with  storage-car  authorization  for 
six   round   trips,    Missouri,    Kansas   &   Texas 

Railway 295 

Storage-space  service 296 

(a)  The  railroads  charged  to  the  mails  all  unauthor- 

ized and  unused  space  reported  in  connection 
with  30-foot  storage  units,  but  did  not  follow 
same  rule  as  to  express 296 

(b)  Duplication  of  claims  of  unused  and  unauthorized 

space  in  connection  with  storage-space  author- 
izations because  of  mails  being  carried  in  over- 
size apartment  cars 297 

(c)  Unauthorized  space  claims  in  connection  with 

storage-space  authorizations,  Kansas  City  to 
Tucumcari,  Chicago,  Rock  Island  &  Pacific 
Railroad -  ■  -       298 

(d)  Claims  of  unauthorized  space  in  connection  with 

storage   space   authorized,    Southern   Railway 

and  Union  Pacific  Railroad 301 

No  charges  of   excess   space    in    mixed    cars   were 

made  against  express  as  were  made  against  mails, 

although  no  operating  reasons  justified  that  action.       302 

(a)  No  charges  of  excess  space  in  mixed  cars  were 

made  against  express  as  were  made  against  the 

mails 302 


23 

Abstract  of  evidence — Oral  testimony — Continued. 
Space  statistics — Continued. 

Excessive  claims  made  by  railroads,  etc. — Continued.  Page. 
(6)  The  point  of  distinction  claimed  by  the  railroads 
between  theii"  obligations  to  carry  the  mails 
and  the  express  and  assigned  as  the  reason  for 
the  difference  in  the  manner  of  charging  space 
to  the,  mails  has  not  imposed  on  the  railroads 
any  difference  in  train  operation : . . .       304 

(c)  It  was  just  as  necessary  for  the  railroads  to  operate 

their  cars  to  care  for  the  express  as  for  the 
mai/s,  yet  they  did  not  charge  space  to  express 
in  a  manner  to  place  express  on  a  parity  with 
the  mails 305 

(d)  Bulk  of  express  business  originates  at  the  same 

point  as  the  bulk  of  the  mail  as  a  general  thing, 
and  changes  in  express  traffic  would  in  a  meas- 
ure parallel  the  mutations  in  the  mail  traffic . .       306 
Apartment,  storage,  and  closed-pouch  service 307 

(a)  Claims  of  unauthorized  and  unused  space  in  con- 

nection with  apartment-car,  storage,  and  closed- 
pouch  authorizations  by  Great  Xorthern  Rail- 
way.    (Post  Office  Department  Exhibit  84.). . .       307 

(b)  Claims  of  unauthorized  and  unused  space  in  con- 

nection with  apartment-car,  storage,  and  closed- 
pouch  authorizations  by  Great  Xorthern  Rail- 
way.   (Post  Office  Department  Exhibit  85.). . .       310 

(c)  Unauthorized  space  claims  in  connection  with 

apartment-car,  storage,  and  closed-pouch 
authorizations,  Chicago,  Rock  Island  &  Pacific 
Railway 311 

(d)  Unauthorized  space  claims  in  connection  with 

authorized   mail   space   made   by   Norfolk   & 

Western  Railway 313 

In  connection  with  closed-pouch    space  authoriza- 
tions         316 

(a)  Unjustified  and  excessive  claims  by  railroads  of 

unused  and  unauthorized  space  operation  in 
connection  with  closed -pouch  space  authorized 

a  part  of  the  time 316 

Contention  of  department  that  space  should  only 
have   been   charged    on   the   days   operated..      317 

(b)  Although  train  would  have  operated  the  same 

under  weight  basis,  in  this  ascertainment  the 
unused  space  is  charged  to  mails  by  the  rail- 
roads for  the  purpose  of  fixing  rate 318 

(c)  Excessive  and  uneconomical  operation  should  not 

be  charged  to  the  mails 319 


24 

Abstract  of  evidence — Oral  testimony— Continued. 
Space  statistics— Continued. 

Excessive  claims  made  by  railroads,  etc.— Continued.  Page. 
((/)  Closed-pouch  units  carried  in  baggage  cars  that 
are  operated. '  Unjustified  charge  to  the  mails 
of  unused  space  reported  in  connection  with 
closed-pouch  units  authorized  in  baggage  cars 
which  would  l)e  operated  ii  no  authorizations 

were  made 320 

(e)  Pronounced  excessive  claims  for  unused  space  in 
connection  with   closed-pouch    authorizations 

and  ratio  of  same  to  authorized  space 321 

(/)  Excessive  claims  of  unauthorized  space  in  con- 
nection with  closed-pouch  authorizations  in 
trains  authorized  to  carry  mails  over  portion  of 

train  run 321 

(g)  Excessive  claims  of  return  movement  of  unau- 
thorized   space    claimed    in    connection   with 

closed-pouch  ser\dce  authorizations 323 

(h)  Excessive  claims  of  unauthorized  space  outward 
and  unauthorized  return  space  in  connection 
with  trains  carrying  closed-pouch  authorizations 

over  parts  of  runs 325 

(i)  Excessive  claims  of  unauthorized  and  unused 
space  cited  fairly  descriptive  and  representative 
of  manner  in  which  the  railroads  generally  re- 
ported and  claimed  the  unauthorized  space 329 

(j)  Unauthorized  space  claims  in  connection  with 
closed-pouch  space  authorizations,  Pennsyl- 
vania Co.     (Post  Office  Department  Exhibits 

86  and  87 .) -  -  -       329 

(k)  Unauthorized  space  claims  in  connection  with 
closed-pouch  space   authorizations,    Big  Four 

Railroad 331 

(l)  Claims  of  unauthorized  space  in  connection  with 
closed-pouch    space    authorizations.    Northern 

Pacific  Railway 332 

Emergency  service 332 

(a)  Excessive  claims  of  unauthorized  space  in  con- 
nection with  emergency  space  authorizations. .       332 
Cases  cited  in  testimony  typical  of  manner  in  which 
the    railroads    reported    and    claimed    space 

throughout  their  reports 337 

Total  of  unauthorized  space  claims  classified  as  "  H  " .       337 

Cases  cited  illustrative  of  space  classified  as  "H" 338 

.  (b)  No  warrant  for  charging  unused  or  return  empty 
space  in  connection  with  emergency  authoriza- 
tions        338 


25 

Abstract  of  evidence — Oral  testimony — Continued. 
Space  statistics — Continued. 

Excessive  claims  made  by  railroads,  etc. — Continued.        Page. 
The  railroads'  apportionment  of  the  unoccupied  space 

in  mixed  cars 338 

(a)  The  railroads  apportioned  unoccupied  space  in  all 
mixed  cars  to  the  mails  on  the  basis  of  the  per 
cent  representing  authorized  space  plus  all  un- 
authorized and  excess  space  claimed  in  connection 
therewith 338 

(b)  Ratio  of  unoccupied  space  charged  to  mails  ob- 
tained by  including  with  the  authorized  space  all 

the  excess  and  unauthorized  space  reported 340 

(c)  Further  discussion  of  the  question  of  the  treat- 
ment of  unoccupied  space  in  mixed  cars  by  Mr. 
Wood,  Mr.  Stewart,  and  Attorney  Examiner  Brown.       340 

(d)  Unoccupied  space  in  mixed  cars  divided  on  basis 

of  loaded  space  in  each  of  the  services 342 

(e)  Apportionment  of  unoccupied  space  in  mixed 
cars  made  upon  aggregate  of  all  train  items  in- 
volved whether  mails  were  carried  in  the  particular 

cars  or  not 343 

In  general 347 

(a)  \Vhile  the  purpose  of  the  inquiiy  was  to  determine 
rates  for  the  units  of  space  designated  in  the  statute, 
the  railroads  proceeded  on  the  theory  of  charging 
to  the  mails  all  space  operated  in  connection  with 
equipment  in  their  possession  as  a  result  of  con- 
ditions under  the  weight  basis 347 

(b)  There  is  substantial  agreement  between  the 
character  of  the  unauthorized  and  unused  space 
described  by  the  Department  on  Exhibits  47  and  48 
and  the  like  space  described  in  the  railroads' 
exhibits '. 350 

(c)  If  the  space  basis  is  retained,  the  railroads  will 
make  changes  in  equipment  to  conform  to  the 
units  determined  upon 350 

(d)  The  railroads'  claim  that  a  requirement  for  space 
for  a  limited  part  of  the  week  raises  a  responsibility 
for  the  rest  of  the  week,  although  no  additional 
space  is  necessarily  run 351 

(e)  The  sum  of  these  excessive  charges  by  the  railroads 
to  the  mails  amounts  to  31.2  per  cent  of  the  author- 
ized space 351 

fj)  Mr.  Wettling's  testimony  as  to  operation  is  quali- 
fied by  the  fact  that  it  is  based  largely  upon  hearsay .      352 

{g)  Qualification  of  Mr.  Wettling's  testimony  regard- 
ing the  alleged  necessity  for  operating  "excess 
over  authorized"  and  "unauthorized"  space 
because  of  mail  authorizations 353 


26 

Abstract  of  evidence — Oral  testimony — Continued. 

Space  etatistics — Continued.  Page. 
The  railroads  reported  and  charged  to  the  mails  every 
possible  excess  and  unauthorized  space  movement  in 
l)oth  directions,  but  reported  only  the  actual  space  used 
for  express,  baggage,  and  miscellaneous  in  each  direc- 
tion separately  in  mixed  cars 358 

The  railroads  reported  only  the  actual  space  used  in 
the  express  service  in  mixed  cars,  while  with 
reference  to  the  mails  they  reported  and  charged 
to  the  mails  every  possible  excess  space  operation. .  358 
]\ailroads  claimed  it  impracticable  to  report  space  in 
express  service  corresponding  to  the  excess,  un- 
authorized, and  unused  space  reported  in  con- 
nection with  the  mail 358 

Similar  unused  space  occurs  in  connection  with 
express  service  as  occurs  in  connection  with  mail 
service,  and  should  have  been  reported  in  the  same 
manner  to  make  the  statistics  for  the  two  services 

comparaljle 359 

Movement  of  full  express  cars  not  the  same  in  both 

diiections 360 

Difference  between  Department  and  railroads  is  not 
Avith  reference  to  the  used  space  but  to  the  excess 

claims  of  unauthorized  and  unused  movements 361 

Peak  load  in  the  express  service  reported  independ- 
ently in  each  direction 361 

Maximum  space  charged  to  the  mails  in  both  direc- 
tions       362 

Peak  load  in  each  direction  separately  charged  to  the 


express. 


363 


If  no  express  was  carried  in  return  movement  no 
charge  of  space  to -express  was  made,  although 
where  no  mails  were  carried  in  return  movement  a 
charge  of  space  was  made  to  the  mails 363 

Miscellaneous  and  baggage  treated  in  same  manner  as 
express 364 

Express,  baggage,  and  miscellaneous  space  not 
treated  in  the  same  manner  as  the  mails 364 

Express  space  reported  by  Baltimore  &  Ohio  based  on 
average  requirements;  no  return  space  reported. . .      366 

Theory  of  the  railroads  in  charging  excess  and  un- 
authorized space  to  mail  service 366 

Preponderance  of  movement  of  express,  l)aggage,  and 
miscellaneous  in  one  dii-ection  typical  of  all  sec- 
tions of  the  country 367 

Recapitulation  of  all  unbalanced  movements  in 
passenger  and  express  services  of  no  value;  each 
route  must  be  considered  l)y  itself 373 


27 

Abstract  of  evidence — Oral  testimony — Continued. 
Space  statistics — Continued. 

The  railroads  reported  and  charged  to  the  mails  every 

possible  excess,  etc. — Continued.  Page 

Failure  to  equalize  space  in  passenger  and  express 
services  accounts  largely  for  the  difference  in  per- 
centage charged  to  mails  by  railroads  and  Post 

Office  Department 375 

Railroad  plan  of  handling  unoccupied  space  over- 
loaded it  by  including  space  that  should  rightly 
have  been  charged  to  baggage,  miscellaneous,  and 
express  ser\T.ces,  greatly  increasing  the  charges  to 

mail  service 375 

The  Department's  assignment  of  unauthorized  and  unused 
space  reported  by  the  railroads  in  connection  with  the 
mails,  and  all  apportionments  of  the  unoccupied  space 

in  mixed  cars 377 

Department's  assignment  of  unauthorized  and  unused 
space  reported  by  the  railroads  in  connection  with 
the  mails 377 

(a)  Assignment  correct  because  the  mail  ser\ice 
should  not  be  penalized  for  uneconomical  railroad 
operation,  nor  should  a  rate  be  predicated  upon  it.       378- 

(b)  In  connection  with  the  mixed  cars 380 

(c)  Reasons  for  the  difference  in  treatment  of  claims 

in  connection  ^vith  full  postal  cars  and  mixed  cars . .       380 

(d)  Unused  space  in  connection  with  storage  space 

was  apportioned 380 

(e)  Assigmnent  of  space  to  passenger  service  where 
apartment  car  is  run  by  railroad  on  days  not  au- 
thorized for  carrying  mails 381 

(/)  Contention  of  Department  that  it  is  not  necessary 

to  run  apartment  cars  on  days  not  authorized 383 

(g)  Department  was  overliberal  in  participating  in  all 

space  in  mixed  cars 384 

(h)  General 385 

On  the  railroads'  theory  of  charging  space  to  the  mails 
they  could  sell  the  same  to  the  Government  regardless 

of  the  postal  needs 385 

The  space  reported  during  the  test  period  was  that  fur- 
nished under  the  weight-basis  system  and  it  was  not  in- 
tended by  the  railroads  to  conform  the  units  to  the 
designated  space-basis  units  until  the  space-basis  system 

should  be  definitely  determined  upon 386 

Specific  cases  discussed 38& 

Combination  of  destination  loads.  Railroad  Exhibit 
No.  65;  a  mutual  arrangement  to  save  transfers 
en  route 386^ 


2« 

Abstract  of  evidence— Oral  testimony— Continued. 
Space  statistics— Continued. 

Specific  cases  discussed— Continued.  Page, 
St.    Louis— Little    Rock— Texarkana;  Railroad    Ex- 
hibit No.  65;  transfer  at  Little  Rock 388 

St.     Louis-Palestine— authorization    beyond    Pales- 
tine; Railroad  Exhibit  No.  65;  transfer  of  mails. . .       389 
Authorizations  of  emergency  service— Railroad  Ex- 
hibit No.  67;  a  method  to  measure  the  service  ac- 
tually performed  and  provide  payment  therefor. . .       391 
Payment  for  storage  space  St.  Louis  to  Fort  Worth, 

Railroad  Exhibit  No.  68 392 

Railroad  Exhibit  No.  68.     Deficiency  in  storage  in 

60-foot  postal  car 395 

Operation  of  car  between  Texarkana  and  Longview 

Junction.     Railroad  Exhibit  No.  68 395 

Caldwell  to  Dallas  via  Fort  Worth  a  60-foot  railway 
post-office  car  was  authorized  between  Caldwell 
and  Fort  Worth,  and  the  railroad  ran  it  through 
from  Fort  Worth  to  Dallas  over  a  weight  route  and 

charged  the  operation  to  the  mails 396 

Specific  cases  mentioned  by  railroad  witnesses  Mack 
and  Searle  are  not  typical  and  representative  in  all 

cases ^98 

Denver  and  Rio  Grande 400 

Omaha  and  Colorado  Springs 401 

Lincoln  and  Billings • 403 

Changing  cars  at  Omaha 405 

Helena  to  Spokane 406 

Oversize  cars  in  trains  401  and  402,  Seattle  to  Port- 
land        406 

Unworked  paper  mail  taken  into  Spokane  Terminal . .  407 
Withholding  paper  mails  for  dispatch  out  of  Portland .  408 
Diversions  of  mail  to  other  lines  where  space  was 

available  and  paid  for 410 

Inferences  drawn  from  railroad  exhibits  unsound 410 

Objection  on  the  part  of  the  Post  Oflice  Department 
to  all  evidence  as  to  increases  in  railroad  wages  and 
expenses  subsequent  to  the  statistical  period- . ....  410 
Railroad  Exhibit  No.  47— Does  not  show  operating 
ratio  for  passenger  service;  does  not  show  ratios  be- 
tween revenue  and  expense  for  any  service  men- 
tioned, including  mail ;  does  not  show  that  the  mails 
participated  in  the  same  degree  as  passenger  in  all 

increased  expenses 411 

Railroad  Exhibit  No.  48— There  is  no  necessary  rela- 
tion between  the  expenditures  for  the  transporta- 
tion of  the  mails  on  railroads  and  expenditures  for 
other  postal  functions 412 


29 

Abstract  of  evidence — Oral  TESTiMONY^Continued. 

Inferences  drawn  from  railroad  exhibits  unsound— Con.  page. 

Railroad  Exhibit  No.  48— Postal  requirements  for 
transjrartation  do  not  increase  in  the  ratio  of  increase 
in  i>ostal  revenues;  the  faulty  conclusions  from  the 

exhibit 416 

Railroad  Exhibit  Xo.  49— The  railroad  testimony  as 
to  rates  being  not  excessive  in  J  898  was  predicated  on 
the  Wolcott  commission  report  and  entirely  omitted 
mention  of  the  Penrose-Overstreet  commission,  17 
years  later,  recommending  certain  reduction  acted 

upon  by  Congress 420 

Railroad  Exhibit  Xo.  52— The  railroads  always  re- 
ceived the  maximum  rate  of  pay  per  mile  provided 

by  statute 422 

Railroad  Exhibit  X^o.  55 — Figures  stated  as  to  pay  on 
basis  of  April,   1917,  weighing,  do  not  represent 

actual  readjustment 422 

Railroad  Exhibit  Xo.  4 — Mr.  Wettling's  per  cent  in- 
crease in  oi)erating  costs  1918  over  1917,  although 
being  a  per  cent  representing  total  aggregate  in- 
crease for  both  freight  and  passenger  ser\'ice,  is 
applied  to  estimated  cost  of  mail  car-mile,  not-nith- 
standing  also  the  fact  that  many  passenger  trains 

were  abandoned  during  1918 423 

Revenue  and  cost  statistics 423 

Operating  revenues,  operating  expenses,  other  expendi- 
tures out  of  operating  revenues,  and  net  income  (for  the 
month  of  April,  1917^  for  passenger,  express,  and  mail. .       423 
Post  Office  Department  Exhibit  66  (for  all  carriers  for 
which  necessary  data  was  secured)  and  Exhibit  67 
for  all  Class  I  carriers  for  which  the  necessary  data 

was  secured) 423 

Reports  compared  with  reports  to  Interstate  Commerce 

Commission 424 

The  directly  allocated  amounts 424 

Examination  of  statement  of  revenues  and  separation 

of  operating  expenses 424 

Attempt  on  the  part  of  the  Department  in  cooperation 
with  the  railroads  to  reach  an  ascertainment  as  to 

the  cost  of  mail  service 425 

Amount  of  operating  expenses  separated  to  passenger 

for  Class  I  carriers 426 

Deviations  from  instructions 426 

Working  sheet 428 

Recapitulation  of  Form  70  (second  part  of  each  Post 

Office  Department  Exhibits  66  and  67) 428 

(a)  Car-miles;  items  1  to  3 428 

(6)  Car-foot  miles;  items  4  and  5,  and  per  cents 429 

(c)  Income  account;  items  7  to  20 429 


30 

Ahhtract  of  evidence — Oral  testimony — Continued. 
Revenue  and  cost  statistics — Continued. 

Operating  revenues,  etc. — Continued.  Page. 
Operating   expenses;  items   8   to    11.     Railway   tax 
accruals,  etc.,  and  other  income  accounts  and  de- 
ductions therefrom 430 

(d)  Car-mile  revenue,  exi)ense,  etc 432 

(e)  Car-foot  mile  revenue,  expense,  etc 432 

(J)  Investment  in  property 1 432 

Separation  between  freight  and  passenger  services  and 

between  passenger,  express,  and  mail  services  of  the 

value  of  railroad  equipment 433 

Return  on  reported  value  of  property  based  on  re- 
ported and  actual  express  and  mail  revenues 436 

The  results  of  Post  Office  Department  Exhibits  66  and 
67   fairly  represent  cost  estimated   on  the   bases 

employed 437 

Recapitulation  of  Form  71  (first  part  of  each  Post 

Office  Department  Exhibits  66  and  67) 439 

Ascertainment  covers  cost  of  initial  and   terminal 

service 439 

Comparison  of  net  income  with  property  investment  as 
shown  on  Post  Office  Department  Exhibits  Nos.  67  and 
66.     Unit  and  cost  figures.     (Post  Office  Department 

Exhibit  No.  74.) 440 

As  to  Post  Office  Department  Exhibit  67 440 

(a)  Revenues 441 

(6)  Net  revenues 441 

(c)  Per  cent  of  net  income  to  operating  revenues 442 

(d)  Income  per  car-mile  and  per  car-foot  mile 442 

(e)  Operating  expenses  per  car-mile 442 

(/)  Net  income  per  car-mile 442 

(g)  Property  investment 442 

Form  R.  M.  P.  No.  57:  Passenger,  express,  and  mail 

equipment 443 

Other  direct  allocations  of  value  of  equipment  would 
have  reduced  passenger  and  therefore  mail  esti- 
mated cost  and  property  value 445 

(h)  Per  cent  of  net  income  to  property  value 446 

As  to  Post  Office  Department  Exhibit  66 446 

(a)  Net  income 446 

(b)  Per  cent  of  net  income  to  operating  revenues 446 

(c)  Revenue  per  car-mile 447 

(d)  Per  cent  of  net  income  to  property  value 447 

In  general 447 


31 

Abstract  of  evidence — Oral  testimony — Continued. 

Revenue  and  cost  statistics — Continued.  Page. 

Revenues,  expenses,  taxes,  and  other  expenditures,  and 
net  income  and  return  on  property  (elements  from  Post 
Office  Department  Exhibit  66),  Post  Office  Department 
Exhibit  75 448 

While  the  railroads  had  the  unit  passenger  car-mile 
revenue  for  the  statistical  period,  they  used  instead  for 
their  purposes  the  figure  for  the  year,  which  was  larger, 
but  did  not  present  the  results  for  the  mails  for  the  year, 
which  would  have  shown  a  larger  net  income  than  the 
statistical  period  showed 452 

Estimated  net  revenues  from  the  mails  so  shown  is  much 
less  than  actual  if  based  upon  more  exact  apportionment 
of  expenses 453 

The  raih'oads'  shoAving  as  to  mail  cost  is  more,  and  as 
to  unit  revenue  is  less,  than  they  should  otherwise  be, 
because  of  the  use  of  ratio  including  excessive  charge 
of  space  to  mails 455 

The  unit  revenue  figures  on  railroads'  Exhibit  No.  3  are 
unduly  reduced  by  the  use  of  prorated  car-foot  miles. . .       456 

The  railroads  do  not  accept  the  rule  recently  followed  by 
the  Commission  with  reference  to  division  of  ways  and 
structures  expenses 459 

The  railroads'  exhibits  give  value  of  all  railroads  (except 
Class  III  and  smtching  and  terminal  roads)  whether 
mails  were  or  were  not  carried  thereon 460 

The  railroads'  apportioned  value  of  property  between 
freight  and  passenger  on  the  ratio  of  operating  expenses, 
but  apportioned  the  value  of  passenger  property  to  the 
mails  on  the  "basis  of  car-foot  miles,  a  higher  ratio..       461 

Present  conditions  as  to  expenses  are  abnormal 462 

The  load  of  the  passenger  train  does  not  appreciably  affect 
cost 462 

April,  1917,  was  a  typical  month  as  regards  expenses  of 
railroads 462 

Basic  space  and  financial  data  not  in  dispute 463 

The  purpose  of  the  statistical  study  was  to  determine  the 

cost  of  performing  the  ser\'ice 463 

Department  objects  to  statistical  and  oral  e\'idence  as  to 
expense  based  upon  period  subsequent  to  selected  sta- 
tistical period 463 

Department  letter  of  instruction  504  was  prepared  after 
conference  between  the  representatives  of  the  Depart- 
ment and  the  railroads  in  which  the  matters  were  dis- 
cussed         464 


u2 

Abstract  of  evidence — Oral  testimony — Continued.  Pago. 

Post  Ollice  Department's  proposed  plan 465 

Regular  authorizations,  paragraph  1 465 

The  Interstate  Commerce  Commission  shall  define 
conditions  under  which  apartment  car  changes  may- 
be made 466 

Operating  conditions  permitting  changes  of  units  of 
apartment  cars 466 

Changing  from  60-foot  car  to  30-foot  apartment 469 

Authorizations  of  car  units  less  than  full  cars  will  be 
made,  as  at  present,  only  at  divisional  points 469 

Discussion  of  Department  plan,  paragraph  1 470 

Paragraph  1  of  Post  Office  plan  as  applied  to  full  rail- 
way post-office  cars  does  not  differ  from  present 
practice 471 

The  determination  of  conditions  under  which  the 
changes  from  a  full  car  shall  be  made  should  rest 
with  the  Department 471 

Interests  of  Government  should  be  considered  in  con- 
nection with  changes  of  authorization  at  divisional 
points  as  compared  with  minor  expense  to  the  rail- 
roads       473 

Emergency  authorization,  paragraph  2 474 

Post  Office  Department  plan  as  to  emergency  units 
recurs  to  original  plan  of  handling,  by  departing 
from  the  combining  of  units 474 

Authorization  of  emergency  units  will  be  made  on  the 

3,  7,  15,  and  30  foot  basis 475 

Emergency  authorizations,  paragraph  3 476 

Authorized  unit  of  storage  or  closed-pouch  space  com- 
bined with  emergency  units,  etc.;  intended  prac- 
tice under  paragraph  3  of  Department's  proposed 

plan 476 

Emergency  authorizations,  paragraph  4 482 

The  Department's  proposed  plan  under  paragraph  4.       482 
Oversize  cars,  paragraph  7 484 

The  Department's  proposed  plan,  paragraph  7 484 

Side,  terminal,  and  transfer  service 486 

Railroads  should  continue  to  perform  side  and  ter- 
minal messenger  service 486 

It  has  been  the  practice  to  require  the  railroads  to 
perform  side  and  terminal  service  under  the  postal 
laws  and  regulations  since  1873 486 

Estimated  cost  to  the  railroads  of  performing  side  and 
terminal  messenger  service 487 

Railroad  companies  probably  could  perform  side  and 
terminal  messenger  service  cheaper  than  the  De- 
partment could 488 

"With  respect  to  side  and  terminal  service 488 


33 

Abstract  of  evidence— Oral  T'^sTIMo.\•Y— Continued. 

Post  Office  Department's  proposed  plan— Continued.  Page. 

Merger  of  rates ^g^ 

Suggestions  for  the  merger  of  the  line  rate  and  initial 

and  terminal  allowance 49I 

Initial  and  terminal  allowance 492 

In  general -g.. 

The    Department's    proposed    plan    represents    the 

judgment  of  Department  officials 493 

Changes  suggested  in  Post  Office  Department's  plan 
would    remove    from    controversy    practically    all 

cases  in  dispute "  494 

.  he  railroads'  proposed  plan '.'."       494 

The  railroads'  proposal  for  rates  based  upon  weights  is  a 

return  to  an  old  and  unsatisfactory  system 494 

Weight  pay  feature  of  railroads'  plan  analyzed 494 

Scale  of  rates  under  railroad  plan  not  equitable  as 

between  companies 495 

Rate  scale  for  weight  under  present  laws 495 

The  railroads'  proposal  of  a  3-cent  rate  for  closed-pouch 
service  an  unnecessary  complication  and  wholly  un- 
justified because  unreasonable "  495 

The  railroads'    proposed   plan,    the   3-cent  rate   for 

closed-pouch  service 49g 

Three-cent  mile  rate  for  closed-pouch  trains  would 
tend  to  discourage  frequency  of  service  on  accoimt 

of  its  cost .qj 

Effect  of  3-cent  rate  for  closed-pouch  service  on  com- 
pensation of  railroads ! 502 

Three-cent  rate  for  closed-pouch  service  multiplies 
the  rates,  complicates  the  system,  and  seems  to  be 

unnecessary -n. 

Three  cents  a  mile  rate  for  closed-pouch  service  an 

unreasonable  one 15Q5 

Pay  for  distribution  space  not    more    easily    adjusted  '  to 
distribution   needs   and    would    multiply  'causes  for  dis- 


agreement . 


505 


The  railroads'  proposed  plan  for  the  authorization  of 
distribution  space  is  not  more  easily  adjusted  to 
distribution  requirements,  nor  would  it  remove 
causes  for  controversy 5O5 

Controversy  as  to  discontinuance  and  reductions  in 
units  of  distributing  space  would  exist  under  rail- 
road plan cAg 

Under  railroad  plan,  eight  different  sizes  of  distribu- 
tion space  units  proWded  for  would  increase  op- 
portunities for  disagreement  between  railroads  and 
Department -0-. 

Pay  for  distributing  facilities  would  multiply  caiises 

for  disagreement rno 

122G98— 19 3  


Abstract  of  evidence-  -Oral  testimony— ^Conlinuod. 

The  railroads'  proposed  plan — Continued.  Page. 

The  railroads'  basis  for  pay  for  distribution  space 508 

Rate  for  distribution  space  in  60-foot  railway  post- 
office     cars    based     on     passenger-train     car-mile 

revenue  (and  plus  an  additional  per  cent) •. .       508 

Rate  for  distribution  si)ace  in  apartment  cars  based 
on  passenger  car-mile  revenue  (and  plus  an  addi- 
tional per  cent) 510 

Higher  rate  for  70-foot  cars  not  justified,  as  they  fur- 
nish no  more  facilities  than  standard  60-foot  cars.. .       511 
The  Department  must  pay  for  the  distributing  space 
as  constructed  by  the  railroads  and  represented  in 

the  cars 512 

The  railroads'  i)roposition  that  the  Department  shall  pay 
for  the  maximum  authorization  of  distribution  space  be- 
tween points  between  which  any  distribution  space  is 

used 513 

The  railroads'  proposal  that  Department  shall  pay  for 

the  authorized  space  to  the  end  of  the  car  run 513 

Pay  for  the  maximum  number  of  linear  feet  of  distrib- 
uting  space  as  far  as  any  distribution  space  is 

needed 513 

The  railroads'  proposal  for  weighings  subject  to  the  objec- 
tions to  the  old  system  and  to  the  additional  objections 

against  weighing  by  railroad  employees 515 

The  method  of  weighing  and  tabulation  under  weight 
basis  described;  the  method  necessarily  employed 

in  a  weighing 515 

General  ol)jections — reviA-al  of  discredited  method..       520 
(a)  1-  estoration  of  weight  l>asis  would  again  bring  to 
the  front  all  of  its  deficiencies,  its  lack  of  fle.xi- 
bility.  and  the  inability  to  compensate  for  un- 
usual conditions 520 

(6)  True  weight  never  ascertained  under  weight  basis; 

unscientific  and  was  guesswork  to  large  extent . .       523 

(c)  Uncertainty  of  average  daily  "weight  obtained  un- 

der weight  basis 524 

(d)  More  inequalities  under  weight-ljasis  system  than 

under  space-basis  system 524 

(c)  Objections  to  annual  weighing  plan  of  railroads..       525 
(/)  Any  weighing  of  the  mails  should  be  done  by  the 

Post  Office  Department 525 

Difficulties  of  securing  and  balancing  weights  under 

railroad  i)lan 526 

(a)  Difficulty  in  securing  weights  at  points  where  no 

railroad  representative  located 526 

(b')  Difficulty  in    securing  balanced  weights  under 

railroad  })lan  of  taking  weights 526 


36 

Abstract  of  evidence— Oral  testimony — Continued. 
The  railroads'  proposed  plan — Continued. 

The  railroads'  proposal  for  weighings,  etc.— Continued.        page. 
('■)  Unsatisfactory  investigations  of  discrepancies  with 
railroad  employees,  owing  to  frefiuent  change 
of  personnel 527 

(d)  Necessary  to  have  weights  tal)ulated  by  trains 527 

(e)  Weighing  interferes  to  some  extent  with  work  in 

the  postal  cars 528 

(/)  Supervision    under    railroad    plan    of    weighing 

would  be  troublesome  and  ex])ensive 528 

iff'  Not  practicable  to  have  weights  of  mail  ^erified 
by  railroad  weighing  and  inspection  bureaus: 
cases  very  different  in  character 528 

( "ost  of  weighing 532 

(o)  Weighers  employed  during  ([uadrenjiial  weigh- 
ings        532 

(b  I  Estimated  cost  of  weighing  for  'Ao  days  annually 
under  railroad  plan  greater  than  under  old  sys- 
tem of  quadrennial  weighings 532 

(r)  Post  Office  Department  would  not  object  to  rail- 
roads paying  cost  of  M'eighing.  on  a  projjer  basis .       533 

(d)  The  railroads  have  no  objection  to  Department 

weighing  at  own  expense 534 

"Railroad  employees  should  not  be  i)ermitted  to  weigh 
the  mails 534 

(a)  Congress  had  good  reasons  for  enacting  law  that 
weights  should  l>e  taken  l)y  sworn  employees 
of  the  Dejiartment 534 

(bi  The  weighing  of  the  mails  by  the  railroads  was 

abolished  1  )y  la w .535 

(c)  Department  still  holds  view  that  if  weight  be  de- 

termined the  proper  measure  of  service  it  would 
be  inadAisable  to  depart  from  practice  of  last  30 
years 535 

(d)  Objection  to  railroads  weighing  the  mails  and  ob- 

jections on  ground  of  complicated  accounting 

and  multiplication  of  reports 536 

(«)   Objections  to  weighing  by  railroad  employees 53« 

Kailroads"  plan  cumbersome;  M'ould  many  times 
multiply  the  work  of  tabulations  and  delay  read- 
justments        537 

(a)  Railroad  plan  of  weighing  cumbersome  and  would 
involve  a  complicated  and  lengthy  system  of 
tabulation 537 

(6)  Work  of  tabulation  multiplied  many  times  under 

railroad  plan  of  taking  the  weights 538 

(c)  Length  of  time  necessary  to  complete  adjust- 
ments under  railroad  plan  of  weighing 540 


36 

Arstract  of  evidence— Oral  testimony — Continued. 
The  railroads'  j^roposed  plan — f  •ontinned. 

Tlic  railroads'  proposal  for  w(n.<i;hins;s,  otc. — Contimied.       Vane. 
Diversions  of  mails  raise  unsettled  difficulties 541 

(a)  Case  involvino;  right   of   Department   to   weigh 

diverted  mail  disputed  by  railroads 541 

(6)  Service  can  not  be  stabilized  immediately  fol- 
lowing diversions  of  mail  and  weighing  held..       541 
Unusual  conditions  can  not  be  met  under  weight  basis 

system 542 

(n)  Unusual  conditions    occurring   during    weighing 

period  reflected  in  pay  for  term 542 

(b)  Congressional  action  necessary  in  the  past  to  com- 

pensate railroads  for  unusual  conditions 542 

(c)  Unusual  conditions  better  taken  care  of  by  space- 

basis  system  than  by  weight-basis  system 544 

The  weight-basis  system  gives  no  recognition  to  frequency 
of  service,  which  is  exactly  compensated  for  under  the 

space  system 544 

Weight  basis  gives  no  recognition  to  frequency  of 

service 544 

Weight-basis  system  does  not  take  into  consideration 

the  frequency  of  service 545 

Space  basis  pays  for  every  mile  of  service  rendered, 

thus  recognizing  frequency 546 

Frequency  of  service  a  factor  that  should  be  con- 
sidered in  fixing  a  rate 54G 

The  railroads'  plan  involves  double  payment  for  part  of  the 
mails,  the  transfer  of  the  handling  of  some  mails  from  the 
railroad  employees  to  the  postal  clerks,  and  other  operat- 
ing difficulties 547 

Railroads'  plan  of  payment  will  result  in  double  pay- 
ment for  carriage  of  mails  carried  in  the  distribution 

end  of  tlie  mail  cars 547 

Railroad  plan  would  result  in  mails  now  being  handled 

in  baggage  cars  being  transferred  to  the  mail  cars. .       548 
Payment  on  space  basis  for  full  space  and  mails  in 
distributing  car  and  on  weight  basis  for  mails  in 
baggage  car  would  entail  difficulties  in  the  way  of 
continuing  conditions  that  existed  during  weighing 

period 550 

Annual  weighings 550 

Annual  weighing  not  opposed  by  Department 550 

If  weight  basis  adopted,  weighings  should  be  for  35 

days  and  conducted  under  old  plan 551 

Average  period  for  annual  weighing 551 

Rates  should  be  based  on  general  average 55 1 

The  proposed  rates  are  averages 551 

Rate  proposition  must  be  treated  on  a  general-average 

basis 552 


37 

Abstract  of  evidence— Oral  testimony— Continued.  Page. 

Consideration  of  bases  for  rates 553 

Rate  should  be  based  upon  u.sc  of  the  property  em- 
ployed         553 

The  controversy  over  unused  space  does  not  affect 
the  question  as  to  whether  payment  shall  be  made 
on  the  ba.sis  of  space  or  weight 554 

Rates  lixed  upon  the  excessive  operation  before  con- 
formation of  equipment  to  prescribed  sizes  would 
not  be  a  just  and  reasonable  rate  for  service  after 
such  conformation  was  made 555 

There  should  be  more  or  less  agreement  between  the 
revenue  to  the  railroads  for  carrying  express  and 
mail  in  a  baggage  car 556 

Consist  of  passenger  trains  made  up  with  reference  to 
space  necessary  to  carry,  etc 556 

Dead  space  should  not  be  given  consideration  in 
fixing  rates  to  the  extent  of  100  per  cent 557 

Utility  of  mail  car  as  a  revenue  earner  as  compared 

with  freight  car 557 

In  considering  value  of  serAice  by  storage  cars  the 
whole  service  should  be  taken  on  its  general  average 
condition  and  not  as  to  specific  car  runs 558 

The  true  basis  for  comparing  service  rendered  in  stor- 
age cars  is  that  of  the  gross  weight  ^id  not  the  tare 
weight  of  load 559 

Gross-ton  mile  basis  proves  that  the  additional  service 
rendered  under  increased  net  load  is  inconsequen- 
tial        560 

The  railroads  prefer  to  carry  the  mails,  not  alone  as 
a  matter  of  prestige,  but  as  pajdng  more  than  out-of- 
pocket  expenses 561 

The  Post  Office  Department  believes  the  railroad  pay 
should  be  less  than  now  received 562 

Abnormal  situation  as  shown  by  the  railroads'  ex- 
hibits        562 

Parcel  post  is  directly  competitive  with  exprpAs 563 

Railroad  comparison  of  car-mile  rates  for  express  with 
mail — Mr.  Worthington's  figures  for  mail  based  on 
authorized  and  all  unauthorized  and  unused  space.       563 

Mr.  Worthington's  figures  on  merchandise  freight 563 

The  railroad's  statistics  of  comparison  between  reve- 
nue from  mails  and  express  (Exhibit  No.  15)  do 
not  represent  actual  or  average  conditions  of  service.       5G4 

Empty  return  movement  in  freight  cars  not  taken  into 
consideration  in  exhibit.s  of  Sprague  comiiaring 
freight  and  mail  revenue 569 


;58 

Abstract  of  evidence— Oral  testimony— ^Contiiniod. 

Coneidoralion  of  bases  for  rates — Continued.  Page. 

No  conclusion  formed  as  to  the  relation  of  the  express 
t  ()  merchandise  c-ar  service 570 

Xo  conclusion  on  com])arison  of  rates  formerchandise 
freight  and  mail 572 

The  railroads'  7  ])er  cent  return  on  property  is  based 
upon  mere  opinion  which  does  not  accord  with  any 
return  ever  received 573 

The  application  to  the  express  of  the  same  processes 
of  building  a  rale  for  mails  which  have  been  fol- 
lowed by  t  he  railroads 574 

Gross  ton-mile  revenue  from  fi'cight  and  mail 579 

The  short  lines 581 

The  lines  for  which  testimony  wa'j  submitted  were 
those  independently  owned  and  operated 581 

Tompanies  have  more  interest  in  carrying  mails  than 
the  mere  revenue  derived 583 

Manner  of  accomplisVdng  differentials  under  contract 

wi'uh  connecting  liues 584 

A] (plication  of  exjjress  differential  a  matter  of  contract      584 

Regular  receipt  of  mails  an  element  in  the  develop- 
ment in  which  the  railroads  are  interested 585 

Pro]ier  for  Commission  to  take  into  consideration  the 
po8sil)i!ity  of  administrative  improvements. . . 586 

Railroad  ))lan  of  railway  mail  pay  not  indorsed  ))y 
Middletown  &  Union ville  Railroad 587 

Freight  revenue  declined  owing  to  decreased  business, 
but  mail  pay  remained  stationary,  notwithstanding 
falling  off  in  volume 587 

Advantage  to  the  railroads  to  have  the  communities 
they  serve  provided  with  mail  service 588 

Should  not  receive  same  compen-sation  for  transporting 
parcels  as  receiA'ed  for  transporting  a  passenger 588 

Post  Oflice  Department  circular  limiting  quantity  of 
parcel  post  to  be  accepted  for  mailing  over  star  route      588 

Cost  of  service  j)lus  a  reasonable  return  an  ideal  basis. .       590 

Differential  for  short  lines  may  be  measured  in  one 
way  by  the  difference  in  freight  and  ])assenger  rates 

from  trunk  line  rates 592 

In  general 592 

Argument 593 

Plans  for  railway  mail  pay — past  and  present 593 

The  practical  operation  of  the  space-basis  system 595 

In  general * 595 

Annual  rates  of  pay  to  the  several  railway  common 

carriers  for  the  month  of  April,  1917 596 


39 

Argument — Continued. 

The  practical  operation  of  the  space-basis  system — Con. 

In  general— Continued.  Page. 

Relation  of  the  different  units  of  service 597 

Space  and  mileage 598 

Weight  and  mileage 599 

Average  loads 599 

Average  hauls 599 

Space-mileage  and  i)ay 600 

Ton-mileage  and  pa}- 601 

Recapitulation 602 

Weighing  for  statistical  purposes 602 

Total  a-\erage  daily  weight,  length  of  routes,  and  total 
pouud-railos  per  day  and  computed  ton-miles  per 

year 603 

Economy  in  space  required  for  mail  purposes  and  in 

miles  of  operation,  under  the  space  system 603 

Saving  to  the  Government  in  aggregate  amount  of  pay 

to  the  railroads 604 

The  administration  of  the  service  under  the  space-basis 

system 606 

The  authorization  of  service  and  adaptation  of  ojjeration 

thereto 606 

In  general 606 

Railway  post-office  car  units 608 

Storage-car  units 609 

Closed -pouch  and  storage-space  units. 609 

Emergency-space  units 611 

Count  of  sacks  and  the  practicable  alternative 613 

Cars  for  railway    post-office  purposes    same    under 

weight  and  space  systems 613 

Oversize  cars  a  disadvantage  to  the  mail  serN-ice 615 

Excess  in  oversize  cars  used  more  advantageously  for 
Railroads  under  the  space-basis  system  than  under 

the  weight-basis  system 616 

Railroads  should  standardize  postal  cars;  convertible 

cars 616 

Specific  advantages  of  the  space-basis  system 617 

Only  the  service  specifically  authorized  is  required  of 
the  Railroads,  and  all  service  authorized  and  per- 
formed is  paid  for 617 

It  enables  a  better  control  of  disi)atches  of  mails  and  a 

closer  supervision  of  the  service CIS 

It  enables  a  better  adjustment  of  service  lo  needs  and 

cost 619 

It  eliminates  the  expense  of  mail  weighings 619 

It  conserves  car  equipment 020 

It  satisfactorily  0(0 mpensates  the  Railroads  for  unusual 
variations  in  the  volume  of  mails  and  for  all 
emerijencv  mails 620 


40 

AuouMENT — Confinuod. 

The  practical  operation  of  the  space-basis  system— Con. 

Specific  advantages  of  the  space-basis  system — Con.  Page. 

It  enables  the  Department  to  administer  the  service 

more  economically 621 

It  harmonizes  with  tiie  fuller  use  of  the  terminal  rail- 
way post-ofKce 323 

It  will  standardize  car  units  for  the  mails  and  give 

rise  to  other  advantages 624 

It  recognizes  frequency  of  service,  which  was  entirely 

ignored  by  the  weight-basi*  system 625 

Space-basis  system  practicable,  equitable,  and  satisfactory.      625 
Operation  of  service  substantially  the  same  on  November 
1,  19)6.  under  space-basis  system  as  theretofore  under 

weight-basis  system 626 

Payment  under  space-basis  system 627 

Some  features  of  Railroads'  performance  of  mail  service. .       628 
Railroad  mail  service  considered  desirable  by  the  Rail- 
roads  ' 629 

Ser\'ice  requirements  and  conditions 629 

Railway  post-office  car  service 629 

Storage-car  and  storage-space  service 630 

Closed-pouch  service 631 

Transfer  clerks  supervise  dispatch  of  mails 632 

Loading  and  unloading  of  mails 633 

Side  and  terminal  messenger  service 633 

Space  statistics 634 

Instructions  concerning  reports  of  certain  operations  of 


space 


636 


Authorizations  of  space  a  better  guide  to  space  used  than 

measurements  by  railroad  employees 637 

Excessive  claims  made  by  the  Railroads  charged  to  the 

mails  in  their  reports  of  space  operated 638 

Sixty -foot  railway  post-office  car  service 639 

Apartment-car  service 641 

Storage-car  service 645 

Storage-space  and  closed-pouch  service 647 

Specific  instances  of  the  excessive  space  claims  made 
by  the  Railroads  against  the  mails  in  accordance 

with  their  plan  above  described 655 

Cases  where  the  Railroads  made  excessive  claims  of 
unauthorized  space  in  connection  with  authorized 
closed -pouch  space,  and  the  ratios  between  the  same      657 
Excessive  claims  of  return  movement  of  unauthorized 

space — closed-pouch  service 658 

Excessive  claims  of  unauthorized  space  outward  and 

unauthorized  return  space — closed-pouch  service..       658 
Emergency  service — Excessive  claims  of  unauthor- 
ized space 60 1 


41 

Argument — Continued. 

Space  statistics— Continued. 

Excessive  claims  made  by  the  Railroads,  etc. — Con.  Pae:e. 

The  Railroads'  method  of  apportioning  unoccupied 

space  in  mixed  cars 661 

On  the  Railroads'  theory  they  could  sell  the  Depart- 
ment space,  regardless  of  postal  needs 661 

Same  operation  oi  cars  under  weight-basis  system 662 

Cases  representative 662 

The  method  of  the  Railroads  violates  the  purpose  of 

the  statistical  inquiry 662 

The  Railroads  reported  space  in  connection  with  the 
mails  on  an  entirely  different  principle  than  they 
reported  space  in  connection  with  the  baggage, 

the  miscellaneous,  and  the  express  services '     665 

The  Department's  charge  of  space  and  operation  to  the  mails      668 
Space  and  operation  authorized  directly  charged  to 

the  mails 669 

Assignments  to  passenger  service 669 

Apportionment  of  unauthorized  and  unused  space  in 

mixed  cars 670 

Specific  cases  discussed 671 

Ultimate    space    ratios    according    to    Post    Office 

Department's  ascertainment 671 

Revenue  and  cost  statistics 672 

Operating  revenues,  operating  expenses  and  other 
expenditures  out  of  operating  revenues,  and  net 
income  (for  the  month  of  April,  1917),  for  pas- 
senger, express,  and  mail 672 

Comparison  of  net  income  with  property  investment. .       676 
Certain  inconsistencies  and  defects  in  the  Railroads' 

method  of  handling  the  liuancial  data 677 

The  Post  Office  Department's  proposed  plan  for  railway  mail 

pay 682 

Regular  authorizations 683 

Emergency  authorizations 683 

Undersized  cars 684 

Deficiency  in  storage  space 685 

Oversized  cars 685 

Side,  terminal,  and  transfer  service 685 

Merger  of  rates 686 

The  Railroads'  proposed  plan 686 

The  Railroads'  proposal  for  rates  based  upon  weights 

is  a  return  to  an  old  and  unsatisfactory  system 686 

The  Railroads'  proposal  of  a  3-cent  rate  for  closed 
pouch  service  is  an  unnecessary  complication  and 
unjustified  because  productive  of  unreasonable 
results 687 


42 

Argument — Coiitinuod. 

The  Railroads'  proposed  plan— ('ontinued.  i>age. 

The  Railroads'  plan  of  authorization  of  distribution 

space  and  basis  for  pay  therefor 6^9 

The  Railroads'  proposition  provides  that  the  Depart- 
ment shall  pay  for  the  maximum  aiithorization  of 
distribution  space  as  far  as  the  car  is  used  for  any 

distribution Ol 

The  Railroads'  proposal  for  weighings  is  subject  to 
the  objections  to  the  old  systems,  and  to  the 
additional  objections  against  weighing  by  railroad 

employees 092 

Cost  of  weighing 693 

Railroad  employees  should  not  be  permitted  to  weigh 

the  mails 693 

Diversions  of  mails  give  rise  to  unsettled  difficulties. . .       694 
Umisual  conditions  can  not  be  met  under  a  weight- 
basis  system 695 

The  weight-basis  system  gives  no  recognition  to  fre- 
quency of  service,  which  is  exactly  compensated 

for  under  the  space-basis  system 69> 

The  Railroads'  plan  involves  double  pavnnent  for  car- 
ria<,'e  of  part  of  the  mails,  and  the  transfer  of  the 
handling  of  some  mails  from  the  railroad  employees 

to  the  postal  clerks 700 

Consideration  of  basis  for  rates 700 

The  present  rates 700 

Maximum    statutory   resultant   rates    per    mile    for 

authorized  units  and  units  equated  to  60- foot  space .       701 
Effect  of  space  basis  of  pay  on  the  railroad  mail  pay  to 

certain  short  line  railroads 702 

Rates  of  pay  under  the  weight-basis  system 703 

Fair  and  reasonable  rates  for  the  service 704 

Considerations  justifjdng  lower  than  commercial  rates      704 

Maximum  rates  on  a  commercial  basis 711 

The  Railroads'  estimate  does  not  produce  a  fair  and  reason- 
able rate 720 

Inferences   drawn    from    certain    Railroad    exhibits 

unsound 720 

Errors  of  theory  and  method  of  calculation  in  Rail- 
road exhibits 722 

The  short  lines 730 

Conclusion 732 

A,ppENDix  A 735 

Appendix  B 739 

Appendix  C 763 

Appendix  D 777 


BEFORE  THE 

INTERSTATE  COISIMERCE  COMMISSION. 

Docket  No.  9200. 


IN  RE  RAILWAY  MAIL  PAY. 


BRIEF  FOR  THE  POSTMASTER  GENERAL  OF  THE 
UNITED  STATES. 


STATEMENT   OF   THE   CASE. 

By  the  terms  of  section  5  of  the  act  of  July  28,  1916  (39 
Stat.  L.,  412,  42.5-431),  Congress  authorized  and  dii-ected 
the  Postmaster  General  to  readjust  the  compensation  to 
be  paid  to  railroad  companies  from  and  after  the  30th  day 
of  June,  1916,  or  as  soon  thereafter  as  practicable,  for  the 
transportation  and  handling  of  the  mails  and  furnishing 
facilities  and  services  in  connection  therewith  upon  the 
conditions  and  at  the  rates  thereinafter  provided. 

The  said  act  provides  that  pending  the  decision  of  the 
Interstate  Commerce  Commission  the  existing  methods 
and  rates  of  railroad  mail  pay  shall  remain  in  effect,  except 
on  such  routes  or  systems  as  the  Postmaster  General  shall 
select  and  to  the  extent  he  may  find  it  practicable  and 
necessary  to  place  upon  the  space  system  of  pay  in  the 
manner  and  at  the  rates  provided,  with  the  consent  and 
approval  of  the  Interstate  Commerce  Commission,  in 
order  to  properly  present  to  the  said  Commission  the  mat- 
ters thereinafter  referred  thereto. 

The  said  act  further  provides  that  all  railw^iy  common 
carriers  are  required  to  transport  such  mail  matter  as  may 
be  offered  for  transportation  by  the  United  States  in  the 
manner,  under  the  conditions,  and  with  the  service  pre- 
scribed by  the  Postmaster  General,  and  shall  be  entitled 
(43) 


44 

to  receive  fair  and  reasonable  compensation  for  siicli  trans- 
portation and  for  the  service  connected  therewith. 

The  said  act  further  empowers  and  duvets  the  Interstate 
Commerce  (\)mmission,  as  soon  as  practicable,  to  fix  and 
determine  from  time  to  time  the  fair  and  reasonable  rates 
and  compensation  for  the  transportation  of  such  mail 
matter  by  railway  common  carriers  and  the  service  con- 
nected therewith,  prescribuig  the  method  or  methods  by 
weight,  or  space,  or  both,  or  otherwise,  for  ascertainmg  such 
rate  or  compensation. 

In  pursuance  of  these  provisions  the  said  act  further 
provides  for  the  filing  with  the  Commission  by  the  Post- 
master General  of  a  statement  showing  the  transportation 
required  of  all  railway  common  carriers,  including  the 
number,  equipment,  size,  and  construction  of  the  cars 
necessary  for  the  transaction  of  the  busmess;  the  service, 
both  terminal  and  en  route,  which  the  carriers  are  to  render; 
and  all  other  information  which  may  be  material  to  the 
inquiry. 

Following  the  passage  of  the  act  above  referred  to,  the 
Postmaster  General  made  application  to  the  Commission 
for  its  consent  and  approval  to  place  upon  the  space  system 
of  pay,  m  the  manner  and  at  the  rates  provided  in  the  act, 
certain  routes  or  systems  selected  by  him  as  those  found 
practicable  and  necessary  to  so  place  upon  the  said  space 
system  of  pay  m  order  to  properly  present  to  the  Commis- 
sion the  matters  provided  for  therein.  The  Commission 
thereafter,  by  order  of  August  29,  1916,  gave  its  consent 
and  approval  to  said  application  and  the  Postmaster 
General  stated  such  routes  and  systems  so  selected  upon 
the  space  basis  of  pay,  as  provided  by  said  act,  from 
November  1,  1916. 

Thereafter  the  respondent  railroad  mail  carriers  petition- 
ed the  Commission  to  set  aside  its  order  of  consent  and 
a])provaI  as  above  mentioned,  but  after  hearing  and 
argument  the  Commission  overruled  and  denied  said 
petition,  leavuig  its  order  in  force  and  effect. 

In  accordance  with  the  provisions  above  referred  to  in 
said  act,  the  Postmaster  General  thereafter  filed  his  state- 
ment  with    the   Commission,    setting   forth    the    matters 


required  by  said  act  to  be  so  presented  to  the  Interstate 
Commerce  Commission,  and  the  railroad  common  carriers 
transporting  the  mails  throughout  the  Ignited  States  were 
duly  notified  thereof  by  the  Commission. 

After  conference  with  a  representative  of  the  Commission, 
the  representatives  of  the  Department  and  the  Railroads 
agreed  upon  a  weighing  and  statistical  period,  beginning 
March  27  and  ending  April  30,  1917,  during  which  there 
should  be  procured  the  statistical  data  with  reference  to 
space  ui  passenger  trains  devoted  to  the  several  services 
performed  in  and  by  said  trains,  and  the  operation  of  such 
space,  and  also  data  with  reference  to  the  revenues  and 
expenditures  of  said  railroad  mail  carriers  m  such  manner 
and  form  as  to  sliow  the  revenues  derived  fi'om  said  services 
and  the  approximate  estimate  of  the  cost  of  performing  the 
same. 

In  accordance  with  said  plan  the  Postmaster  General 
authorized  a  weighing  of  the  mails  upon  all  railroad  mail 
routes  throughout  the  United  States  for  the  statistical 
period,  and  the  Department  prepared  and  sent  to  the  rail- 
road mail  carriers  complete  and  definite  forms  with  specific 
instructions  for  reporting  the  statistical  data  above  re-, 
ferred  to.  These  forms  and  instructions  were  introduced 
in  evidence  and  are  known  as  Post  Office  Department  Ex- 
hibit No.  27,  infra. 

The  mails  were  accordingly  weighed  and  from  the  re- 
turns of  such  weights  so  secured  the  average  daily  weight  of 
mails  carried  on  each  mail  route,  respectively,  throughout 
the  United  States,  was  computed  hy  the  Department  and 
the  rates  of  pay  authorized  by  the  act  of  1873  and  the 
amending  acts,  providing  for  railroad  mail  pay  upon  the 
weight  basis,  were  applied  thereto  for  each  route  and  the 
results  stated  in  Post  Office  Department  Exhibit  No.  38, 
infra. 

Tlie  reports  made  ))y  the  railroad  mail  carriers  on  the 
forms  abot^e  reierred  to,  covering  the  space  and  financial 
data  were  checked  and  tabulated  anri  refhiced  to  ultimate 
results,  whicJi  are  shown  in  Post  OlTice  Department  Ex- 
hi;>iis  Nos.  66,  67,  68,  74  and  75,  infra. 


46 

At  the  hearings  coiuliicte;!  in  tliis  case  the  Post  Office 
Department  presented  89  exhihits  showiii}::  mainly  the  sta- 
tistical results  of  the  inquiry,  a  di^ijcst  oi  which  is  herein- 
after set  forth,  pages  48  to  102.  Oral  testimony  was  also 
submitted  by  witnesses  for  the  Post  Office  Department  and 
for  the  railroad  mail  carriers,  an  abstract  of  which  testi- 
mony is  set  forth  hereinafter,  pages  103  to  592,  to  which 
the  Post  Office  Department  directs  attention  in  support  of 
the  presentation  of  matters  herein. 

The  Postmaster  General  contends  that  the  space  basis  of 
pay  for  the  transportation  of  the  mails  and  the  service  con- 
nected therewith  has  been  shown  to  be  entirely  satisfactory 
to  tlie  Post  Office  Department,  and  to  be  a  more  accurate 
measure  of  the  service  performed  by  the  railroads  in  carry- 
ing the  mails  than  the  old  weight-basis  system;  that  it  is 
a  true  gauge  of  the  service  so  performed;  that  under  it  no 
service  is  required  of  the  railroads  without  corresponding 
payment  therefor,  and  no  payment  is  made  to  the  railroads 
excepting  for  services  rendered  therefor,  and  that  in  these 
respects  it  differs  from  the  old  weight-basis  system:  that 
under  the  space-basis  system  the  service  can  be  and  has 
been  more  economically  administered  and  conducted  than 
under  the  old  weight-basis  system;  that  great  economies 
have  been  effected  under  the  space-basis  system,  resulting 
in  saving  of  expenditure  on  the  part  of  the  Post  Office  De- 
partment and  the  elimination  of  needless  car  operation  on 
the  part  of  the  railroad  mail  carriers.  The  Postmaster 
General  further  contends  that  the  evidence  has  established 
the  fact  that  the  maximum  rates  provided  for  by  the  act 
of  July  28,  1916,  supra,  result  in  a  payment  to  the  railroads 
for  carrying  the  mails  of  an  amount  in  excess  of  a  fair  and 
reasonable  return  therefor;  that  the  estimated  cost  of  per- 
forming the  service  in  the  carriage  of  the  mails,  as  shown 
by  the  evidence,  together  with  a  fair  return  in  addition 
thereto,  justifies  a  much  smaller  payment  in  the  aggregate 
for  said  services  than  the  railroads  are  now  receiving;  that 
the  evidence  shows  that  if  the  railroads  were  paid  for  the 
carriage  of  the  mails  and  the  service  in  connection  there- 
with at  the  same  rates  they  receive  per  ton-mile  for  carrying 
express  matter  of  the  nearest  kind  under  similar  conditions, 


47 

they  would  receive  in  the  aggregate  a  sum  far  less  than  that 
which  they  are  now  receiving:  and  that  the  fair  and  reason- 
able rates  and  compensation  for  the  transportation  of  the 
mail  and  the  service  in  connection  therewith  on  the  space 
basis  of  pay  are  lower  than  those  prescribed  by  the  act  of 
July  28,  1916,  supra.  The  several  amounts  of  compensa- 
tion and  the  unit  rates  above  referred  to  are  set  forth  in 
detail  and  fully  explained  in  the  evidence  and  argument 
hereinafter. 


DIGEST    OF   POST    OFFICE    DEPARTMENT 
EXHIBITS. 


POST  OFFICE  DEPARTMENT  EXHIBIT  NO.  1.— PAMPHLET 
OF  INFORMATION,  ISSUED  BY  THE  SECOND  ASSIST- 
ANT POSTMASTER  GENERAL,  RELATIVE  TO  THE 
TRANSPORTATION  OF  MAILS  BY  RAILROADS  AND 
COMPREHENDING  INSTRUCTIONS  AND  RULINGS 
UNDER  THE  ACT  OF  JULY  28,  1916— THE  SPACE 
SYSTEM. 

This  exhibit  contains  a  transcript  of  the  principal  laws 
and  postal  regulations  relating  to  the  transportation  of  the 
mails  by  railroads;  the  construction,  sanitation,  operation, 
etc.,  of  full  and  apartment  railway  post-office  cars;  trans- 
portation of  mails  by  freight  or  express;  general  perform- 
ance of  mail  service  by  railroad  companies;  authorizations 
of  deductions  and  fines;  conveyance  of  letters  by  private 
express;  carrying  of  letters  outside  of  mails  by  common 
carriers;  offenses;  and  transportation  of  mails  on  electric 
and  cable  cars. 

It  also  embraces  the  instructions  and  rulings  issued  by 
the  Second  Assistant  Postmaster  General  with  reference  to 
the  railroad  mail  service  under  the  space-basis  system  of 
transportation  and  payment,  revised  to  May  15,  1918,  and 
based  upon  the  act  approved  July  28,  1916,  (39  Stat., 
412,425-431). 

POST  OFFICE  DEPARTMENT  EXHIBIT  NO.  2.— STANDARD 
FLOOR  PLANS  FOR  CONVERTIBLE  60-FOOT-30-FOOT 
AND  15-FOOT-30-FOOT  MAIL  CARS. 

This  exhibit  embraces  floor  plans  showing  in  detail  how  a 
standard  60-foot  full  railway  post-office  car  may  be  con- 
verted into  a  standard  30-foot  mail  apartment  car  with  30 
feet  of  baggage  space  or  reconverted  into  its  original  form 
as  a  60-foot  full  car,  and  a  floor  plan  for  converting  astan- 
(48) 


49 


dard  15-foot  mail  apartment  car  into  a  standard  30-foot 
mail  apartment  car,  or  vice  versa. 

These  floor  plans  are  supplemental  to  those  standard  car 
floor  plans  submitted  to  the  commission  on  February  26, 
1917,  as  a  part  of  the  statement  of  the  Postmaster  General, 
which  embraced  floor  plans  for  standard  60-foot,  50-foot, 
and  40-foot  full  railway  post-ofRce  cars,  30-foot,  25-foot, 
20-foot,  15-foot,  12-foot,  10-foot,  and  8-foot  standard  mail 
apartment  cars,  15-foot,  12-foot,  10-foot,  8-foot  and 
6-foot  standard  alley  mail  apartment  cars,  for  standard 
lo-foot  mail  apartment  narrow  gauge  cars,  and  for  standard 
40-foot  mail  apartment  car  in  70-foot  cars,  together  with 
various  drawings  giving  detail  of  construction  of  ecjuipment 
and  fittings. 

In  general  the  interior  fittings  of  mail  cars  consist  of 
pigeon  hole  letter  cases  for  the  distribution  of  letter  mails, 
movable  bag  racks  for  hanging  pouches  and  sacks  for  the 
distribution  of  paper  mails  and  letter  packages,  with  a 
portion  of  the  space  at  either  or  both  ends  of  the  car  stan- 
chioned for  storage  of  mail.  The  amount  of  space  and 
the  number  of  separations  for  letters  and  papers  provided 
for  each  of  these  functions  in  the  standard  sizes  of  full 
railway  post-office  and  apartment  railway  post-office  cars 
provided  in  the  act  of  July  28,  1916,  are  as  follows: 


Unit. 

Distribu- 
tion 
space. 

Door- 
ways. 

Storage 
space. 

Letter 
separa- 
tions. 

Paper 
separa- 
tions. 

Port- 
able 
letter 
separa- 
tions. 

Storage 
space 
and 
closet 
facili- 
ties. 

60-foot    full    railway    post- 

Ft.     in. 
36 
17    2 

7    0? 

Ft.  in. 

7      8 
2    10 
2      6 

Ft.  in. 
16    4 



612 
312 
156 

234 
106 
46 

54 

Ft.  in. 

30-foot  mail  apartment  car. . 
15-foot  mail  apartment  ear. . 

10 
4    61 

The  number  of  separations  and  the  space  devoted  to  the 
several  functions  in  the  convertible  60-foot-30-foot  cars  and 
the  15-foot-30-foot  convertible  cars  is  the  same  as  m  the 
standard  cars  of  those  sizes. 


50 

POST  OFFICE  DEPARTMENT  EXHIBIT  NO.  3.— STATEMENT 
SHOWING  THE  NUMBER  OF  CARS  AND  CAR  UNITS 
REMODELED  OR  CHANGED  SUBSEQUENT  TO  ADOP- 
TION OF  STANDARD  PLANS  OF  FEBRUARY  26,  1912, 
AND  PRIOR  TO  NOVEMBER  1,  1916,  AND  FOR  THE 
PERIOD  SUBSEQUENT  THERETO. 

This  exhibit  shows  in  detail  the  number  of  railway  post- 
ofRce  cars  remodeled  or  changed  subsequent  to  the  adop- 
tion of  the  standard  plans  dated  February  26,  1912,  and 
prior  to  November  1,  1916,  when  the  space  basis  plan  for 
railwaj^-mail  pay  became  effective,  and  of  the  railway  post- 
office  cars  remodeled  or  changed  after  November  1,  1916. 
It  shows  that  for  the  first  period  named,  265  cars  were  so 
remodeled  or  changed  and  that  subsequent  to  November  1, 
1916,  290  cars  were  so  remodeled  or  changed. 

POST  OFFICE  DEPARTMENT  EXHIBIT  NO.  4.— STATE- 
MENT SHOWING  ANNUAL  MILES  OF  SERVICE,  AN- 
NUAL RATES  OF  LINE  PAY  AND  INITIAL  AND  TER- 
MINAL ALLOWANCES,  BY  UNITS  OF  SERVICE,  ON 
RAILROAD  MAIL  ROUTES,  STATED  UPON  THE  SPACE 
BASIS  OF  PAY,  AUTHORIZED  ON  NOVEMBER  1,  1916, 
AND  THE  UNIT  RATES  PER  MILE  FOR  AUTHORIZED 
SERVICE. 

The  exhibit  shows  as  authorized  on  November  1,  1916, 
the  several  units  of  full  and  apartment  railway  post-office 
cars,  of  full  storage  cars,  and  of  storage  space  and  closed- 
pouch  space  in  cars  less  than  full  cars  devoted  to  the  mails, 
the  miles  of  service  performed  per  annum  for  each  of  the 
said  units,  the  per  cent  of  the  same  of  the  whole,  the  line 
pay  stated  as  annual  rate,  the  initial  and  termmal  allow- 
ance stated  as  annual  rate,  and  the  total  combined  annual 
rate,  the  per  cents  of  the  annual  rate  Ime  pay  and  initial 
and  terminal  allowance  of  the  total  annual  rate  for  each 
unit,  the  total  pay  as  annual  rate,  the  per  cent  of  the  whole 
for  each  unit  of  service,  and  the  rate  per  mile  of  service  as 
authorized  for  each  unit  of  service.  Distinction  is  also 
made  between  nonland-grant  and  land-grant  service. 


51 

The  total  miles  of  service  per  annum  shown  is  577,867,985, 
of  which  the  several  units  of  service  (nonland-grant  and 
land-grant  combined)  are  as  follows: 

Per  cent. 

60-foot  full  railway  post-office  cars 16. 24 

30-foot  apartment  railway  post-office  cars 27. 17 

15-foot  apartment  railway  post-office  cars 15. 51 

60-foot  storage  cars 10. 09 

30-foot  storage  space 2. 04 

15-foot  storage  space 2.  96 

7-foot  storage  space 2. 39 

3-foot  storage  space 1-83 

7-foot  closed-pouch  space 3. 16 

3-foot  closed-pouch  space 1 8. 61 

The  total  line  pay  is  shown  to  be  $58,157,624.88,  with 
total  initial  and  terminal  allowance  as  $6,290,357.59,  total 
pay  bemg  $64,447,982.47,  of  which  the  several  units,  of 
service  (nonland-grant  and  land-grant  combined)  are  as 
follows : 

Per  cent. 

60-foot  full  railway  post-office  cars 31. 30 

30-foot  apartment  railway  post-office  cars 29. 29 

15-foot  apartment  railway  post-office  cars 11. 56 

60-foot  storage  cars 19. 35 

30-foot  storage  space 1-97 

15-foot  storage  space 1. 50 

7-foot  storage  space 57 

3-foot  storage  space 19 

7-foot  closed-pouch  space 95 

3-foot  closed-pouch  space 3. 32 

The  resulting  rates  per  mile  of  service  authorized  (non- 
land-grant and  land-grant  combmed)  are  shown  as  follows: 

Cents. 

60-foot  full  railway  post-office  cars 21. 49 

30-foot  apartment  railway  post-office  cars 12. 02 

15-foot  apartment  railway  post-office  cars 8. 31 

60-foot  storage  cars 21. 38 

30-foot  storage  space 10.  74 

15-foot  storage  space 5. 67 

7-foot  storage  space 2.  65 

3-foot  storage  space 1. 20 

7-foot  closed-pouch  space 3. 35 

3-foot  closed-pouch  space 1. 99 


POST  OFFICE  DEPARTMENT  EXHIBIT  NO.  5.— STATE- 
MENT SHOWING  ANNUAL  MILES  OF  SERVICE,  AN- 
NUAL RATES  OF  LINE  PAY,  AND  INITIAL  AND  TER- 
MINAL ALLOWANCES,  BY  UNITS  OF  SERVICE,  ON 
RAILROAD  MAIL  ROUTES,  STATED  UPON  THE  SPACE 
BASIS  OF  PAY,  AUTHORIZED  ON  MARCH  27,  1917, 
AND  THE  UNIT  RATES  PER  MILE  FOR  AUTHORIZED 
SERVICE. 

This  exhibit  shows  as  authorized  on  March  27,  1917,  the 
several  units  of  full  and  apartment  railway  post-ofhce  cars, 
of  full  storage  cars,  and  of  storage  space  and  closed-pouch 
space  in  cars  less  than  full  cars  devoted  to  the  mails,  the 
miles  of  service  per  annum  for  each  of  the  said  units,  the 
per  cent  of  the  same  of  the  whole,  the  line  pay  stated  as 
annual  rate,  the  initial  and  terminal  allowance  stated  as 
annual  rate,  and  the  total  combined  annual  rate,  the  per 
cents  of  the  annual  rate  line  pay,  and  initial  and  terminal 
allowance  of  the  total  annual  rate  for  each  unit,  the  total 
pay  as  annual  rate,  the  per  cent  of  the  whole  for  each  unit 
of  service,  and  the  rate  per  mile  as  authorized  for  each 
unit  of  service.  Distinction  is  also  made  between  non- 
land-grant  and  land-grant  service. 

The  total  miles  of  service  per  annum  shown  is 
557,151,915.99,  of  which  the  several  units  of  service  (non- 
land-grant  and  land-grant  combined)  are  as  follows: 

Per  cent. 

60-foot  full  railway  post-office  cars 15.  46 

30-foot  apartment  railway  post-office  cars 26.  05 

15-foot  apartment  railway  post-office  cars 17.  40 

60-foot  storage  cars 9-00 

30-foot  storage  space 1-93 

15-foot  storage  space 2.  81 

7-foot  storage  space 2.  54 

3-foot  storage  space 1-82 

7-foot  closed-pouch  space 3.  38 

3-foot  closed-pouch  space 19.  01 

The  total  Hue  pay  is  shown  to  be  $53,873,590.07  with 
total  initial  and  terminal  allowance  as  $5,880,089.14,  total 
pay  being  $59,753,679.21,  of  which  the  several  units  of 
service  (nonland-grant  and  land-grant  combined)  are  as 
follows : 


53 

Per  cent. 

60-foot  full  railway  post-office  cars 30.  90 

30-foot  apartment  railway  post-office  cars 29.  03 

15-foot  apartment  railway  post-office  cars 13.  22 

60-foot  storage  cars 17.  89 

30-foot  storage  space 1-94 

15-foot  storage  space 1-50 

7-foot  storage  space 62 

3-foot  storage  space 20 

7-foot  closed-pouch  space 1.  06 

3-foot  closed-pouch  space 3.  64 

The  resulting  rates  per  mile  of  service  authorized  (non- 
and-grant  and  land-grant  combined)  are  shown  as  follows: 

Cents. 

60-foot  full  railway  post-office  cars 21.  43 

30-foot  apartment  railway  post-office  cars 11.  94 

15-foot  apartment  railway  post-office  cars 8. 14 

60-foot  storage  cars 21.  31 

30- foot  storage  space 10.  79 

15-foot  storage  space 5.  72 

7-foot  storage  space 2.  63 

3-foot  storage  space 1-22 

7-foot  closed-pouch  space 3.  36 

3-foot  closed-pouch  space 1.  99 

POST  OFFICE  DEPARTMENT  EXHIBIT  NO.  6.— STATE- 
MENT SHOWING  ANNUAL  MILES  OF  SERVICE,  AN- 
NUAL RATES  OF  LINE  PAY,  AND  INITIAL  AND  TER- 
MINAL ALLOWANCES,  BY  UNITS  OF  SERVICE,  ON 
RAILROAD  MAIL  ROUTES,  STATED  UPON  THE  SPACE 
BASIS  OF  PAY,  AUTHORIZED  ON  JUNE  30,  1917,  AND 
THE  UNIT  RATES  PER  MILE  FOR  AUTHORIZED 
SERVICE. 

This  exhibit  shows  as  authorized  on  June  30,  1917,  the 
several  units  of  full  and  apartment  railway  post-office  cars, 
of  full  storage  cars,  and  of  storage  space  and  closed-pouch 
space  in  cars  less  than  full  cars  devoted  to  the  mails,  the 
miles  of  service  performed  per  annum  for  each  of  the  said 
units,  the  per  cent  of  tlio  same  of  the  whole,  the  line  pay- 
stated  as  annual  rate,  the  initial  and  terminal  allowance 
stated  as  annual  rate,  and  the  total  combined  annual  rate, 
the  per  cents  of  the  annual  rate  line  pay,  and  initial  and 
terminal  allowance  of  the  total  annual  rate  for  each  unit, 
the  total  pay  as  annual  rate,  the  per  cent  of  the  whole  for 


54 

each  unit  of  service,  and  the  rate  per  mile  as  authorized  for 
each  unit  of  service.  Distinction  is  also  made  between 
nonland-grant  and  land-grant  service. 

The  total  miles  of  service  per  annum  shown  is 
541,943,368.47,  of  which  the  several  units  of  service  (non- 
land-grant  and  land-grant  combined)  are  as  follows: 

Per  cent. 

60-1'oot  full  railway  post-office  cars 15.  32 

30-foot  apartment  railway  post-office  cars 25.  54 

15-foot  apartment  railway  post-office  cars 18.  26 

60-foot  storage  cars 8.  44 

30-foot  storage  space 1-71 

15-foot  storage  space 2.  78 

7-foot  storage  space 2.  64 

3-foot  storage  space 1-92 

7-foot  closed-pouch  space 3.37 

3-foot  closed-pouch  space 20.  02 

The  total  line  pay  is  shown  to  be  $51,519,136.45  with 
total  initial  and  terminal  allowance  as  $5,658,459.57,  total 
pay  being  $57,177,596.02,  of  which  the  several  units  of 
service  (nonland-grant  and  land-grant  combined)  are  as 
follows : 

Per  cent. 

60-foot  full  railway  post-office  cars 31.  09 

30-foot  apartment  railway  post-office  cars 28.  89 

15-foot  apartment  railway  post-office  cars 13.  88 

60-foot  storage  cars 17.  08 

30-foot  storage  space 1-76 

15-foot  storage  space 1-65 

7-foot  storage  space 66 

3-foot  storage  space 22 

7-foot  closed-pouch  space 1-07 

3-foot  closed-pouch  space 3.  70 

The  resulting  rates  per  mile  of  service  authorized  (non- 
land-grant and  land-grant  combined)  are  shown  as  follows : 

Cents. 

60-foot  full  railway  post-office  cars 21.  41 

30-foot  apartment  railway  post-office  cars 11.  93 

15-foot  apartment  railway  post-office  cars 8.  02 

60-foot  storage  cars 21.  34 

30-foot  storage  space 10.  83 

15-foot  storage  space 6-24 

7-foot  storage  space 2.  62 

3-foot  storage  space 1-23 

7-foot  closed-pouch  space 3.  37 

3-foot  closed-pouch  space 1.  95 


55 

POST  OFFICE  EXHIBIT  DEPARTMENT  NO.  7.— STATE- 
MENT SHOWING  ANNUAL  MILES  OF  SERVICE,  AN- 
NUAL RATES  OF  LINE  PAY  AND  INITIAL  AND  TER- 
MINAL ALLOWANCES,  BY  UNITS  OF  SERVICE,  ON 
RAILROAD  MAIL  ROUTES,  STATED  UPON  THE  SPACE 
BASIS  OF  PAY,  AUTHORIZED  ON  MARCH  31,  1918, 
AND  THE  UNIT  RATES  PER  MILE  FOR  AUTHORIZED 
SERVICE. 

Tliis  exhibit  shows  as  authorized  on  March  31,  1918,  the 
several  units  of  full  and  apartment  railway  post-office  cars, 
of  fuU  storage  cars,  and  of  storage  space  and  closed-pouch 
space  in  cars  less  than  full  cars  devoted  to  the  mails,  the 
miles  of  service  performed  per  annum  for  each  of  the  said 
units,  the  per  cent  of  the  same  of  the  whole,  the  Ime  pay- 
stated  as  amiual  rate,  the  initial  and  terminal  allowance 
stated  as  annual  rate,  and  the  total  combined  annual  rate, 
the  per  cents  of  the  amiual  rate  line  pay  and  initial  and 
terminal  allowance  of  the  total  annual  rate  for  each  unit, 
the  total  pay  as  annual  rate,  the  per  cent  of  the  whole  for 
each  imit  of  service,  and  the  rate  per  mile  of  service  as 
authorized  for  each  unit  of  service.  Distinction  is  also 
made  between  nonland-grant  and  land-grant  service. 

The  total  miles  of  service  per  annum  shown  is 
510,486,407.58,  of  which  the  several  units  of  service 
(nonland-grant  and  land-grant  combined)  are  as  follows: 

Per  cent. 

60-foot  full  railway  post -office  cars 14.  65 

30-foot  apartment  railway  post-office  cars 23.  90 

15-foot  apartment  railway  post-office  cars 19.  36 

60-foot  storage  cars 9-08 

30-foot  storage  space 1-49 

15-foot  storage  space 2.  64 

7-foot  storage  space -•'14 

3-foot  storage  space --05 

7-foot  closed-pouch  space •^•67 

3-foot  closed-pouch  space 20.  72 

The  total  line  pay  is  shown  to  be  $47,830,650.52  with 
total  initial  and  terminal  allowance  as  $5,078,838.93,  total 
pay  being  .$52,909,489.45,   of  which  the  several  units  of 


56 

service  (nouland-grant   and  land-grant   combined)    are  as 
follows : 

Per  cent. 

60-fooI  lull  railway  post-office  cars 30.  28 

30-foot  a])artmciit  railway  post-oliice  cars 27.  40 

15-f()ot  apartment  railway  post-pffice  cars 14.  56 

60-foot  storage  cars 18.  70 

30-foot  storage  space 1.  58 

15-foot  storage  space 1.  44 

7-foot  storage  space 62 

3-foot  storage  space 24 

7-foot  closed-pouch  space 1 .  20 

3-foot  closed-pouch  space 3.  98 

The  resulting  rates  per  mile  of  service  authorized  (non- 
land-grant  and  land-grant  combined)  are  shown  as  follows: 

Cents. 

60-foot  full  railway  post-office  cars 21.  42 

30-foot  apartment  railway  post-office  cars 11.  88 

15-foot  apartment  railway  post-office  cars 7.  80 

CO-foot  storage  cars 21.34 

30-foot  storage  space 10.  91 

15-foot  storage  space 5.65 

7-foot  storage  space 2.  63 

3-foot  storage  space 1.  23 

7-foot  closed-pouch  space 3.39 

3-foot  closed-pouch  space 1.  99 

POST  OFFICE  DEPARTMENT  EXHIBIT  NO.  8.— STATE- 
MENT SHOWING  ANNUAL  MILES  OF  SERVICE,  AN- 
NUAL RATES  OF  LINE  PAY  AND  INITIAL  AND  TER- 
MINAL ALLOWANCES,  BY  UNITS  OF  SERVICE,  ON 
RAILROAD  MAIL  ROUTES,  STATED  UPON  THE  SPACE 
BASIS  OF  PAY,  AUTHORIZED  ON  JUNE  30,  1918,  AND 
THE  UNIT  RATES  PER  MILE  FOR  AUTHORIZED 
SERVICE. 

The  exhibit  shows  as  authorized  on  June  30,  1918,  the 
several  units  of  full  and  apartment  railway  post-office  cars, 
of  full  storage  cars,  and  of  storage  space  and  closed-pouch 
space  in  cars  less  than  full  cars  devoted  to  the  mails,  the 
miles  of  service  performed  per  annum  for  each  of  the  said 
units,  the  per  cent  of  the  same  of  the  whole,  the  line  pay 
stated  as  annual  rate,  the  initial  and  terminal  allowance 
stated  as  annual  rate,  and  the  total  combined  annual  rate, 
the  per  cents  of  the  annual  rate  line  pay  and  initial  and 
terminal  allowance  of  the  total  annual  rate  for  each  unit, 
the  total  pay  as  annual  rate,  the  per  cent  of  the  whole  for 


57 

each  unit  of  service,  and  the  rate  per  mile  of  service  as 
authorized  for  each  unit  of  service.  Distinction  is  also 
made  between  nonland-grant  and  land-grant  service. 

The  total  miles  of  service  per  annum  shown  is 
504,961,489.99,  of  which  the  several  units  of  service  (non- 
land-grant  and  land-grant  combined)  are  as  follows: 

Per  cent. 

60-foot  full  railway  post-office  cars 14.  72 

30-foot  apartment  railway  post-office  cars 23.  63 

15-foot  apartment  railway  post-office  cars 19.  72 

60-foot  storage  cars 8.  93 

30-foot  storage  space 1-53 

15-foot  storage  space 2.  52 

7-foot  storage  space 2.  47 

3-foot  storage  space 2. 14 

7-foot  closed-pouch  space 3.  49 

3-foot  closed-pouch  space 20.  85 

The  total  line  pay  is  shown  to  be  .$47, 162,319.85  with 
total  initial  and  terminal  allowance  as  S5,019,732.42,  total 
pay  being  S52, 182,052.27,  of  which  the  several  units  of 
service  (nonland-grant  and  land-grant  combined)  are  as 
follows : 

Per  cent 

60-foot  full  railway  post  office  cars 30.  50 

30-foot  apartment  railway  post  office  cars 27. 15 

15-foot  apartment  railway  post  office  cars 14.  87 

60-foot  storage  cars 18.  42 

30-foot  storage  space 1-62 

15-foot  storage  space 1-39 

7-foot  storage  space 64 

3-foot  storage  space 26 

7-foot  closed-pouch  space 1-15 

3-foot  closed-pouch  space 4.  00 

The  resulting  rates  per  mile  of  service  authorized  (non- 
land-grant  and  land-grant  combined)  are  shown  as  follows: 

Cents. 

60-foot  full  railway  post-office  cars 21.  43 

30-foot  apartment  railway  post-office  cars 11.  87 

15-foot  apartment  railway  post-office  cars 7.  79 

60-foot  storage  cars 21.  32 

30-foot  storage  space 10.  91 

15-foot  storage  space 5.  67 

7-foot  storage  space 2.  63 

3-foot  storage  space 1-23 

7-foot  closed-pouch  space 3.  40 

3-foot  closed-pouch  space 1-98 


58 

POST  OFFICE  DEPARTMENT  EXHIBIT  NO.  9.— STATE- 
MENT SHOWING  AMOUNTS  OF  LINE  PAY,  INITIAL 
AND  TERMINAL  ALLOWANCES,  AND  TOTAL  PAY 
FOR  SERVICE  ON  RAILROAD  MAIL  ROUTES,  STATED 
UPON  THE  SPACE  BASIS,  FOR  THE  MONTH  OF  APRIL, 
1917. 

This  exhibit  shows  for  each  raih'oad  company  whose 
routes  were  stated  upon  the  space  basis  of  payment,  the 
amount  of  line  pay,  both  regular  and  emergency,  the 
amount  of  initial  and  terminal  allowance,  both  regular 
and  emergency,  and  the  total  amount,  both  regular  and 
emergency,  paid  for  the  performance  of  railroad  mail 
service  on  each  route  stated  upon  the  space  basis,  during 
the  month  of  April,  1917,  the  total  of  such  amounts  being 
as  follows: 


Service. 

Line  pay. 

Initial  and 
terminal 
allowance. 

Total. 

$4,303,858.90 
33,697.87 

$461,260.91 
2, 887. 16 

$4,76.5,119.81 

Emergency 

36,585.03 

4,337,556.77 

464,148.07 

4, 801, 704. 84 

POST  OFFICE  DEPARTMENT  EXHIBIT  NO.  10.— STATE- 
MENT SHOWING  AMOUNTS  OF  COMPENSATION  PAID 
FOR  SERVICE  ON  RAILROAD  MAIL  ROUTES,  STATED 
UPON  THE  WEIGHT  BASIS  OF  PAY,  FOR  THE  MONTH 
OF  APRIL,  1917. 

This  exhibit  shows  for  each  railroad  company,  whose 
routes  were  stated  upon  the  weight  basis  of  payment,  the 
amount  of  compensation  paid  upon  each  route  and  the 
total  for  each  company  for  the  month  of  April,  1917. 
The  total  compensation  paid  for  mail  service  upon  routes 
stated  upon  the  weight  basis  for  the  month  of  April,  1917, 
as  shown  by  this  exhibit,  was  $89,374.89. 


POST  OFFICE  DEPARTMENT  EXHIBIT  NO.  11.— (1)  STATE- 
MENT SHOWING  BY  WEIGHING  SECTIONS  THE  TOTAL 
AVERAGE  WEIGHT  OF  MAILS  CARRIED  PER  DAY; 
LENGTH  OF  ROUTES;  POUND-MILES  PER  DAY,  AND 
COMPUTED  TON-MILES  FOR  THE  YEAR  1917,  BASED 
UPON  THE  RETURNS  OF  THE  SPECIAL  WEIGHING  OF 
THE  MAILS,  MARCH  27  TO  APRIL  30,  1917,  INCLUSIVE; 
(2)  COMPUTED  ANNUAL  TON-MILEAGE,  1917,  BASED 
ON  RETURNS  OF  SPECIAL  WEIGHING,  MARCH  27  TO 
APRIL  30,  1917,  INCLUSIVE,  COMPARED  WITH  TON- 
MILES,  LAST  PRECEDING  WEIGHING. 

Part  1  of  this  exhibit  shows  for  each  weighing  section  the 
total  average  weight  carried  per  day,  the  length  of  the  rail- 
road mail  routes  over  which  mails  were  carried,  the  pound- 
miles  of  mail  carried  per  day,  and  the  computed  annual 
ton-miles  for  the  year  1917,  based  upon  the  returns  of  the 
special  weighing  of  the  mails  March  27  to  April  30,  1917, 
inclusive,  and  the  results  are  shown  as  follows: 

Total  average  weight  earned  per  day pounds. .         20,  ]31,  302 

Length  of  mail  routes  over  which  mails  were  carried, 

miles 234,306.95 

Pound-miles  carried  per  day 4,  526, 524, 485 

Computed  annual  ton-miles  for  the  year  1917 826,  090,  715 

Part  2  of  this  exliibit  compares,  by  weighing  sections, 
computed  ton-miles  for  the  year  1917  based  on  the  special 
weighmg  March  27  to  April  30,  1917,  w4th  the  computed 
annual  ton-miles  based  upon  the  last  regular  quadrennial 
weighing  in  each  weighing  section,  and  shows  the  increase 
in  ton-miles  and  the  percentage  of  such  increase.  The 
results  are  expressed  as  follows: 

Computed  ton-miles  for  the  year  1917 826,  090,  715 

Computed  ton-miles  based  on  last  regular  weighings 699,  882, 946 

Increase  in  ton-miles,  1917 126,  207,  769 

Per  cent  of  increase 18.  03 


60 

POST  OFFICE  DEPARTMENT  EXHIBIT  NO.  12.— STATE- 
MENT OF  THE  AVERAGE  LOADS  CARRIED  IN  THE 
SEVERAL  UNITS  OF  AUTHORIZED  MAIL  SPACE, 
GROUPED  ACCORDING  TO  THE  SEVERAL  STATE 
ROUTE  NUMBERS,  BASED  UPON  A  SPECIAL  WEIGHING 
OF  THE  MAILS  DURING  THE  WEEK  APRIL  12  TO  18, 
1917,  INCLUSIVE. 

This  exhibit  shows  for  full  railway  post-office  cars,  apart- 
ment railway  post-office  cars,  mail  storage  cars,  and  mail  stor- 
age space  of  the  several  units,  classified  by  States  according  to 
railroad  mail  route  numbers,  the  average  load  in  pounds  of 
mail  carried  in  such  units,  and  the  average  of  all  units  of 
each  class,  based  upon  a  special  weighing  of  the  mails 
during  the  week  April  12  to  18,1917,  inclusive.  The  gen- 
eral average  load  for  each  class  of  service  is  shown  by  this 
exhibit  to  be  as  follows : 

Pounds, 

60-foot  full  railway  post-office  cars 5,  079 

30-foot  apartment  railway  post-office  cars 1,  675 

15-foot  apartment  railway  post-office  cars 536 

60-foot  mail  storage  cars 13, 114 

30-foot  mail  storage  space 6,  575 

15-foot  mail  storage  space 3,  726 

7-foot  mail  storage  space 1,  998 

3-foot  mail  storage  space 795 

POST  OFFICE  DEPARTMENT  EXHIBIT  NO.  13.— TABLE 
SHOWING  COMPARISON  OF  THE  ANNUAL  RATE  OF 
COMPENSATION  FOR  RAILROAD  TRANSPORTATION 
OF  THE  MAILS  BY  CERTAIN  RAILROAD  COMPANIES 
IN  EFFECT  OCTOBER  31,  1916,  UNDER  WEIGHT  BASIS 
OF  PAY;  ON  NOVEMBER  1,  1916,  WHEN  THE  SPACE 
BASIS  BECAME  OPERATIVE;  AND  RATE  OF  PAY  IN 
EFFECT  FEBRUARY  15,  1918,  WHEN  THE  CONDITIONS 
AND  PAY  BECAME  STABLE. 

This  exhibit  shows,  first,  for  railroads  50  to  100  miles  in 
length,  the  mileage  of  track  over  which  mail  service  is  per- 
formed, the  annual  rate  of  pay  on  October  31,  1916,  on 
November  1,  1916,  and  on  February  15,  1918,  with  the  net 
increase  or  decrease  from  October  31,  1916,  to  February  15, 
1918;  and,  second,  the  same  information  for  railroads  less 
than  50  miles  in  length.  The  results  are  shown  to  be  as 
follows : 


61 


Railroads 
50  t.o  100 
miles  in 
length. 

Railroads 

less  than 

50  miles  in 

length. 

Mileage 

4,771.19 

2,533.81 

Annual  rate  of  pay: 

$476,246.36 
537,r)78.84 
468,632.56 
86,796.45 
86,377.19 

$242,663.91 

343,809.58 

Feb  15  1918                                          

252,653.16 

62,181.08 

50,569.90 

POST  OFFICE  DEPARTMENT  EXHIBIT  NO.  14.— STATE- 
MENT OF  THE  ESTIMATED  NUMBER  AND  WEIGHTS  OF 
SHIPMENTS  HANDLED  IN  OTHERWISE  EMPTY  STOR- 
AGE CARS  WITHOUT  ADDITIONAL  COST  DURING  THE 
TWO-YEAR  PERIOD  ENDING  OCTOBER  31,  1918,  AND 
THE  ESTIMATED  COST  OF  TRANSPORTATION  OF  SUCH 
SHIPMENTS  HAD  THEY  BEEN  HANDLED  BY  FREIGHT 
OR  EXPRESS  AS  THERETOFORE. 

This  exhibit  shows  the  estimated  number  of  cars  of  blue- 
tag  mail  matter,  mail  bags,  envelopes  and  newspaper 
%vrappers,  and  postal  cards  that  would  have  been  required 
to  handle  by  freight  or  express  under  the  weight  basis  of 
payment,  with  the  estimated  weight  of  each  and  the  esti- 
mated transportation  cost  by  freight  or  express,  which 
were  handled  in  otherwise  empty  storage  cars  without 
additional  cost  during  the  two-year  period  ending  October 
31,  1918.     The  results  shown  by  this  exhibit  are  as  follows: 

Estimated  number  of  cars  of  freight  or  express 9, 100 

Estimated  weight pounds. .       227,  417, 144 

Estimated  transportation  cost $1,  327,  933.  78 

POST  OFFICE  DEPARTMENT  EXHIBIT  NO.  15.— STATE- 
MENT SHOWING  REDUCTION  IN  MILES  OF  SERVICE  IN 
CARS  AND  SPACE  IN  CARS  OPERATED  IN  THE  CAR- 
RIAGE OF  MAILS  ON  ROUTES  STATED  ON  THE  SPACE 
BASIS,  AS  SHOWN  BY  A  COMPARISON  OF  THE  MILES 
OF  SERVICE  OF  THE  SEVERAL  CLASSES  OF  UNITS, 
AUTHORIZED  AS  OF  NOVEMBER  1,  1916,  AND  THAT 
AUTHORIZED  AS  OF  JUNE  30,  1918,  AFTER  THE  SERV- 
ICE WAS  ADJUSTED  TO  THE  SPACE  SYSTEM  AS  PRO- 
VIDED BY  THE  ACT  OF  JULY  28,  1916. 

This  exhibit  shows  for  each  of  the  units  of  full  railway 
post-ofFice  cars,  apartment  railway  post-ofRce  cars,  storage 
cai-s,  storage  space  in  mixed  cars,  and  close(l-])ouch  space 


62 

in  mixed  cars,  the  miles  of  service  per  amium  authorized 
as  of  November  1,  1916,  and  as  of  June  30,  1918,  with  tlie 
increase  or  decrease  and  per  cent  of  increase  or  decrease  in 
each  unit  of  service.  The  results  shown  by  this  exhibit 
arc  as  follows: 

Total  miles  of  service  authorized  as  of  Nov.  1,  191G 577,  867, 980 

Total  miles  of  service  authorized  as  of  June  30,  1918 504,  971, 485 

Decrease 72,896,495 

Per  cent  of  decrease 12.  61 

The  per  cent  of  increase  or  decrease  in  each  unit  of 
service  is  shown  to  be  as  follows: 


60-foot  railway  post-office  cars 

30-foot  apartment  railway  post-office  cars. 
15-foot  apartment  railway  post-offlee  cars. 

60-foot  storage  cars 

30-foot  storage  space 

15-foot  storage  space 

7-foot  storage  space 

3-foot  storage  space 

7-foot  closed-pouch  space 

3-foot  closed-pouch  space 


20.  85 
24.01 


22.71 
34.11 
25.25 
9.82 


3.50 
2.13 


POST  OFFICE  DEPARTMENT  EXHIBIT  NO.  16.— STATE- 
MENT SHOWING  THE  COMPUTED  AVERAGE  LENGTH 
OF  TRIP  FOR  THE  SEVERAL  UNITS  OF  SERVICE  OVER 
STATED  RAILWAY  POST-OFFICE  RUNS. 

This  exhibit  shows  for  each  of  the  units  of  service  the 
'computed  average  length  of  the  unit  trip  over  stated  rail- 
way post-office  runs,  and  the  results  are  shown  to  be  as 
follows : 

Miles. 

60-foot  railway  post-office  cars 367 

30-foot  apartment  railway  post-office  cars 205 

15-foot  apartment  railway  post-office  cars 86 

60-foot  storage  cars 420 

30-foot  storage  space 263 

15-foot  storage  space 172 

7-foot  storage  space 154 

3-foot  storage  space 104 

7-foot  closed-pouch  space 100 

3-foot  closed-pouch  space 48 


63 

POST  OFFICE  DEPARTMENT  EXHIBIT  NO.  17.— STATE- 
MENT SHOWING  TON-MILEAGE  AND  PAY  PER  TON- 
MILE  FOR  TRANSPORTATION  AND  RAILWAY  POST- 
OFFICE  CAR  SERVICE  COMBINED,  AS  OF  APRIL  30, 
1913,  BY  CLASSES  OF  ROUTES. 

This  exhibit  shows  for  former  weight  routes  stated  upon 
the  weight  basis  of  pay,  classified  according  to  average  daily 
weights  carried  as  of  April  30,  1913,  the  combined  trans- 
portation and  railway  post-ofSce  car  service  pay  per 
annum,  the  per  cent  of  the  pay  for  each  class  of  routes  to  the 
whole,  the  ton-miles  per  annum,  the  per  cent  of  ton-miles 
in  each  class,  and  the  pay  per  ton-mile  for  each  class  of 
routes  for  transportation  and  for  transportation  and  rail- 
way post-office  car  service  combined.  The  results  shown 
by  tliis  exhibit  are  as  follows : 

Combined    transportation    and    railway    post-office    car 

service  pay  per  annum ?51,  286,  057.  79 

Ton-miles  per  annum 510,  827,  522 

Pay  per  ton-mile  for  transportation cents . .  9.17 

Pay  per  ton-mile  for  transportation  and  railway  post- 
office  car  service  combined cents . .  10.  04 

It  also  shows  the  ton-mile  rates  for  each  of  the  classes  of 
routes  to  have  been  as  foUows : 


Classes  of  routes  according  to  average  daily  weight  carried. 


Pay  per  ton-mile. 

Transpor- 

tation and 

Transpor- 

railway 

tation. 

post-office 

car  service 

combined. 

SI.  4924 

$1.4024 

.8024 

.8024 

.5305 

.5305 

.4140 

.4141 

.3618 

.3620 

.  2fi97 

.2704 

.1998 

.2023 

.0924 

.1028 

.0576 

.0661 

211  poimds  or  less 

212  to  519  i>ounds , 

520  to  1,019  pounds.... 
1,020  to  1,519  pounds... 
1,520  to  2,059  pounds.. 
2,060  to  3,559  pounds . . 
3,560  to  5,079  pounds . . 
5,080  to  48,103  pounds . . 
48,104  pounds  and  over 


64 

POST  OFFICE  DEPARTMENT  EXHIBIT  NO.  18.— CIRCU- 
LAR  LETTER   NO.    316. 

Circular  letter  No.  316,  of  the  Second  Assistant  Post- 
master General,  addressed  to  all  superintendents  of  the 
Railway  Mail  Service,  giving  instructions  as  to  the  infor- 
mation that  should  be  furnished  in  connection  with 
recommendations  for  additional  space  on  railroad  routes 
contemplating  additional  expenditures. 

POST  OFFICE  DEPARTMENT  EXHIBIT  NO.  19.— STATE- 
MENT SHOWING  COST  OF  QUADRENNIAL  WEIGHINGS 
AND  TABULATIONS  IN  EACH  WEIGHING  SECTION, 
1913-1916;  COST  OF  WEIGHING  ON  WEIGHT  BASIS 
ROUTES,  FOURTH  SECTION,  1918;  AND  COST  OF  STA- 
TISTICAL WEIGHING,  MARCH  27  TO  APRIL  30,   1917. 

This  exhibit  shows  the  cost  of  the  quadrennial  weighings 
and  tabulations  for  the  regular  quadrennial  weighings 
in  the  four  weighing  sections  for  the  years  1913  to  1916, 
the  cost  of  the  quadrennial  weighing  and  tabulation  on 
weight  routes  in  the  fourth  weighing  section,  spring  of 
1918,  and  the  cost  of  the  statistical  weighing  and  tabula- 
lation  for  the  period  March  27  to  April  30,  1917.  In  this 
exhibit  it  is  shown  that  the  total  cost  of  the  last  four 
regular  quadrennial  weighings  was  $1,088,619.49,  or  an 
average  of  $273,154.87  per  year;  that  the  cost  of  the 
quadrennial  weighing  and  tabulation  on  weight  basis 
routes  in  the  fourth  contract  section,  spring  of  1918,  was 
approximately  $7,000;  and  that  the  cost  of  the  statistical 
weighing  and  tabulation,  March  27  to  April  30,  1917,  was 
$484,718.51. 

POST  OFFICE  DEPARTMENT  EXHIBIT  NO.  20.— FLOOR 
PLAN  FOR  STANDARD  30-FOOT  MAIL  APARTMENT 
CAR   FOR   NARROW-GAUGE    RAILROADS. 

This  exhibit  is  supplemental  to  the  statement  of  the 
Postmaster  General  covering  standard  car  floor  plans, 
and  Exhibit  No.  2  covering  floor  plans  for  convertible 
cars,  and  completes  the  set  of  standard  car  plans. 


('.5 

POST  OFFICE  DEPARTMENT  EXHIBIT  NO.  21.— STATE- 
MENT OF  CHARLES  H.  McBRIDE,,NOW  SUPERINTEND- 
ENT DIVISION  OF  RAILWAY  MAIL  PAY  STATIS- 
TICS, AND  SUPERINTENDENT  DIVISION  OF  RAIL- 
WAY ADJUSTMENTS  AT  THE  TIME  THE  RULE  FOL- 
LOWED IN  DETERMINING  THE  ROUTES  TO  BE 
PLACED   ON  THE    SPACE   BASIS   WAS   MADE. 

This  exhibit  states  the  rule  followed  by  the  department 
at  the  time  of  the  installation  of  the  space  basis  in  determin- 
ing the  routes  to  be  placed  on  the  space  basis.  In  general, 
the  restatement  of  the  routes  upon  the  space  basis  followed 
the  statement  of  the  railway  post-office  runs  which  usually 
coincide  with  the  train  runs.  In  cases  also  where  it  was 
found  that  a  train  carried  closed-pouch  mails  over  a  route 
or  part  of  a  route  selected  for  space  basis  statement,  the 
remainder  of  the  train  run  being  over  a  route  upon  which 
closed-pouch  service  only  was  performed,  such  service 
was  stated  upon  the  space  basis.  The  remainder  of  the 
routes  were  continued  upon  the  weight  basis  because,  as 
stated  in  the  Postmaster  General's  answer  to  the  railroad's 
petition  to  vacate  the  commission's  order: 

"It  is  wholly  unnecessary  to  place  the  closed-pouch 
routes  on  the  space  system  of  pay  for  the  purpose  of 
properly  presenting  to  the  Interstate  Commerce  Com- 
mission the  matters  referred  to  them  by  the  act.  The 
weighing  of  the  mails  thereon  may  be  done  and  the  col- 
lection of  the  appropriate  data  with  respect  to  the  space 
occupied  by  the  mails  and  aU  other  information  the 
cornmission  may  desire  may  be  made  with  equal  facility- 
while  the  service  remains  as  at  present  stated.  Such 
ascertainment  is  a  mere  matter  of  apportionment  based 
upon  the  weight  or  number  of  pouches  and  sacks  carried, 
or  on  measurement  in  the  cars.  The  data  secured  wiU, 
therefore,  furnish  as  complete  a  comparison  with  respect 
to  the  bases  of  pay  as  if  the  routes  were  formally  author- 
ized on  the  space  basis." 

122698—19 5 


66 

POST  OFFICE  DEPARTMENT  EXHIBIT  NO.  22.— STATE- 
MENT OF  CHARJ.es  H.  McBRIDE,  NOW  SUPERIN- 
TENDENT DIVISION  OF  RAILWAY  MAIL  PAY  STA- 
TISTICS, AND  SUPERINTENDENT  DIVISION  OF 
RAILWAY  ADJUSTMENTS  AT  THE  TIME  THE  RUL- 
INGS NOS.    10  AND   11,  WERE  ADOPTED. 

This  exhibit  states  the  basis  for  the  rules  followed  by  the- 
department  in  determining  the  linear  feet  of  closed-pouch 
space  and  storage  space  needed,  and  describes  the  basis 
for  the  count  of  sacks  to  be  accommodated  in  each  linear 
foot  of  space.  This  basis  was  predicated  upon  145  tests 
consisting  of  actual  counts  of  mail,  conducted  in  every 
division  of  the  Railway  Mail  Service  which  showed  that  an 
average  of  45^^  sacks  of  mail  could  be  piled  in  3  linear  feet 
of  space  both  sides  of  car.  It  also  states  the  basis  for  the 
rule  to  count  three  outside  pieces  of  mail  or  empty  equip- 
ment as  one  sack. 

POST  OFFICE  DEPARTMENT  EXHIBIT  NO.  23.— STATE- 
MENT BY  RAILROAD  COMPANIES  OR  SYSTEMS  OF 
THE  ANNUAL  MILES  OF  SERVICE  FOR  THE  SEV- 
ERAL UNITS,  WITH  THE  ANNUAL  RATES  OF  PAY 
FO"R  THE  SAME,  THE  ANNUAL  RATES  FOR  IN- 
ITIAL AND  TERMINAL  ALLOWANCES,  AND  TOTAL 
ANNUAL  PAY,    AUTHORIZED    ON   MARCH   27,   1917. 

This  exhibit  shows  for  each  railroad  company  whose 
routes  were  stated  upon  the  space  basis,  the  authorized 
annual  miles  of  service  as  of  March  27,  1917  (the  be- 
ginning of  the  statistical  weighing  period),  the  annual  rate 
of  line  pay,  initial  and  terminal  allowance,  and  total  pay 
for  each  of  the  units  of  service,  and  the  totals  for  each 
companyf  or  all  classes  of  service  stated  upon  the  space  basis. 
The  totals  for  all  companies  whose  service  was  stated  upon 
the  space  basis  of  pay  on  March  27,  1917,  were  as  follows: 
Annual  miles  of  service 557, 151,  915.  99 

Annual  rate  of  line  pay §53,  873,  590.  07 

Annual  rate  of  initial  and  terminal  allowance 5,  880,  089. 14 

Total  annual  rate  of  pay 59,  753,  679.  21 

This  exhibit,  together  with  Exhibit  No.  24,  supplements 
the  statement'  showing  transportation  required  of  all 
railway  common  carriers  in  the  carriage  of  the  mails  whose 


67 

service  was  stated  on  the  space  basis  of  pay  as  of  November 
1,  1916,  as  presented  on  pages  20  to  659  of  the  statement 
of  the  Postmaster  General  submitted  to  the  commission 
on  February  26,  1917,  by  showing  the  same  information, 
by  totals  for  companies,  as  of  March  27,  1917,  the  begin- 
ning of  the  statistical  period. 

POST  OFFICE  DEPARTMENT  EXHIBIT  NO.  24.— STATE- 
MENT OF  RAILROAD  MAIL  ROUTES  STATED  UPON 
SPACE  BASIS  OF  PAY  MARCH  27,  1917;  AUTHOR- 
IZED ANNUAL  MILES  OF  SERVICE;  AUTHORIZED 
ANNUAL  RATES  OF  LINE  PAY,  AND  INITIAL  AND 
TERMINAL  ALLOWANCES,  AND  THE  AVERAGE 
DAILY  WEIGHT  OF  MAILS  CARRIED  ON  SUCH 
ROUTES,  AS  SHOWN  BY  A  SPECIAL  WEIGHING  FOR 
35  DAYS,  MARCH  27  TO  APRIL  30,  1917,  INCLUS- 
IVE. 

This  exhibit  shows  for  each  railroad  company,  whose 
routes  were  stated  upon  the  space  basis  of  payment,  the 
length  of  each  route  or  part  of  route  so  stated;  the  annual 
miles  of  service,  annual  rate  of  line  pay,  annual  rate  of 
initial  and  terminal  allowance,  and  total  annual  rate  of 
pay  for  service  authorized  on  March  27,  1917;  and  the 
average  daily  weight  carried  upon  each  such  route  during 
the  statistical  weighing  period,  March  27  to  April  30,  1917. 
The  total  results  shown  in  this  exhibit  are  as  follows: 

Length  of  routes  (miles) 244,  740.  63 

Annual  miles  of  service 557, 151,  915.  99 

Annual  rate  of  line  pay 153,  873,  590.  07 

Annual  rate  of  initial  and  terminal  allowance 5,  880,  089. 14 

Total  annual  rate  of  pay 59,  753,  679.  21 

This  exhibit,  together  with  Exhibit  No.  23,  supplements 
the  statement  of  service  required  and  authorized  on  Novem- 
ber 1,  1916,  as  shown  on  pages  20  to  659  of  the  statement 
of  the  Postmaster  General  submitted  to  the  commission 
on  February  26,  1917,  by  showing  the  same  information, 
by  route  totals,  as  of  March  27,  1917;  and  in  addition 
shows  the  average  daily  weight  of  mails  carried  upon  each 
of  the  routes  stated  upon  the  space  basis  ascertained  from 
the  results  of  the  special  weighing  of  the  mails,  March  27 
to  April  30,  1917. 


68 


POST  OFFICE  DEPARTMENT  EXHIBIT  NO.  25.— STATE- 
MENT OF  FULL  RAILWAY  POST  OFFICE,  STORAGE, 
AND  APARTMENT  RAILWAY  POST  OFFICE  CARS  OF 
THE  STANDARD  SIZE  AND  OF  CARS  OF  LESSER 
LENGTH  ACCEPTED,  REQUIRED  TO  OPERATE  THE 
SERVICE  AUTHORIZED    AS   OF   MARCH   27,   1917. 

This  exhibit  shows  for  each  raih-oad  company  and  each 
railway  post-office  line  the  number  of  cars  necessary  to 
fill  authorizations  of  specific  units  authorized  as  of  March 
27,  1917,  in  full  railway  post-office  cars  and  apartment 
railway  post-office  cars;  the  number  of  cars  necessary  as 
operated  by  the  railroad  companies;  the  number  of  cars 
of  lesser  length  authorized,  operated,  and  paid  for  pro  rata; 
and  the  number  of  storage  cars  necessary  to  cover  regular 
authorizations;  also  states  the  practice  with  respect  to 
maintenance  by  the  railroad  companies  of  reserve  cars; 
also  the  number  of  mail  storage  car  movements  operated 
under  authorizations  of  irregular  frequency  during  the 
statistical  period  March  27  to  April  30,  1917,  and  the 
number  of  emergency  mail  storage  cars  additional  operated 
during  the  statistical  period  March  27  "to  April  30,  1917. 

POST  OFFICE  DEPARTMENT  EXHIBIT  NO.  26.— STATE 
MENT  SHOWING,  BY  RAILROAD  COMPANIES,  THE 
CHARACTER  OF  CONSTRUCTION  OF  FULL  RAIL- 
WAY POST  OFFICE  CARS  AND  APARTMENT  RAIL- 
WAY POST  OFFICE  CARS,  OWNED  AND  OPERATED 
IN  CONNECTION  WITH  RAILROAD  MAIL  SERVICE 
AS   OF   MARCH   27,   1917. 

This  exhibit  shows  for  each  railroad  company  the  kind 
of  mail-car  equipment  (full  railway  post-office  cars  and 
apartment  railway  post-office  cars)  owned  and  operated 
in  connection  with  railroad  mail  service  as  of  March  27, 
1917,  classifymg  the  same  according  to  the  length  of  cars 
and  whether  constructed  of  steel,  steel  underframe,  or 
wood.  The  results  for  all  railroad  companies  shown  by 
this  exhibit  are  as  follows : 


Kind. 

Steel. 

Steel  un- 
derframe. 

Wood. 

47 
190 

790 

828 

1 
13C 

420 
168 

262 

Apartment  cars,  15  feet  and  less  than  30  feet  in  length. 
Apartment  cars  and  full  railway  post-office  cars  of  30 

1,725 
1,035 

Full  railway  post-office  cars,  60  feet  and  upward.... 

130 

Total  number  of  cars,  5,742. 


69 

POST  OFFICE  DEPARTMENT  EXHIBIT  NO.  27.— CIRCULAR 
LETTERS  OF  INSTRUCTION  AND  FORMS. 

This  exhibit  embraces  copies  of  all  circular  letters  of 
instruction  issued  by  the  Post  Office  Department  in  con- 
nection with  the  statistical  inquiry  and  copies  of  all  blank 
forms  used  in  reporting  and  tabulating  the  information. 

POST  OFFICE  DEPARTMENT  EXHIBIT  NO.  28.— CONSOLI- 
DATED STATEMENT  OF  SPACE  STATISTICS  OF  THE 
ATLANTIC  COAST  LINE  RAILROAD  CO. 

This  exhibit  recapitulates  by  route  totals  the  mformation 
as  to  space  submitted  by  the  Atlantic  Coast  Line  Railroad 
Co.  upon  R.  M.  P.  Forms  Nos.  1,  2,  3,  and  4. 

POST  OFFICE  DEPARTMENT  EXHIBIT  NO.  29.— CONSOLI- 
DATED STATEMENT  OF  SPACE  STATISTICS  OF  THE 
BALTIMORE  &  OHIO  RAILROAD  CO. 

This  exhibit  recapitulates  by  route  totals  the  information 
as  to  space  submitted  by  the  Baltimore  &  Ohio  Raiboad 
Co.  upon  R.  M.  P.  Forms  Nos,  1,  2,  3,  and  4. 

POST  OFFICE  DEPARTMENT  EXHIBIT  NO.  30.— CONSOLI- 
DATED STATEMENT  OF  SPACE  STATISTICS  OF  THE 
BANGOR  &  AROOSTOOK  RAILROAD  CO. 

This  exhibit  recapitidates  by  route  totals  the  information 
as  to  space  submitted  by  the  Bangor  &  Aroostook  Railroad 
Co.  upon  R.  M.  P.  Forms  Nos.  1,  2,  3,  and  4. 

POST  OFFICE  DEPARTMENT  EXHIBIT  NO.  31.— CONSOLI- 
DATED STATEliIENT  OF  SPACE  STATISTICS  OF  THE 
HOCKING  VALLEY  RAILWAY  CO. 

This  exhibit  recapitulates  by  route  totals  the  information 
as  to  space  submitted  by  the  Hocking  Valley  Railway  Co. 
upon  R.  M.  P.  Forms  Nos.  1,  2,  3,  and  4. 

POST  OFFICE  DEPARTMENT  EXHIBIT  NO.  32.— CONSOLI- 
DATED STATEMENT  OF  SPACE  STATISTICS  OF  THE 
NORTHERN  PACIFIC  RAILROAD  CO. 

This  exhi})it  recapitulates  by  route  totals  the  information 
as  to  space  submitted  by  the  Northern  Pacific  Railroad  Co. 
upon  R.  M.  P.  Forms  Nos.  1,  2,  3,  and  4. 


POST  OFFICE  DEPARTMENT  EXHIBIT  NO.  33.— CONSOLI- 
DATED STATEMENT  OF  SPACE  STATISTICS  OF  THE 
OREGON  SHORT  LINE  RAILROAD  CO. 

This  exhibit  recapitulates  by  route  totals  the  information 
as  to  space  submitted  by  the  Oregon  Short  Line  Railroad 
Co.  upon  R.  M.  P.  Forms  Nos.  1,  2,  3,  and  4. 

POST  OFFICE  DEPARTMENT  EXHIBIT  NO.  34.— CONSOLI- 
DATED STATEMENT  OF  SPACE  STATISTICS  OF  THE 
SAN  ANTONIO  &  ARANSAS  PASS  RAILWAY  CO. 

This  exhibit  recapitulates  by  route  totals  the  information 
as  to  space  submitted  by  the  San  Antonio  &  Aransas  Pass 
Railway  Co.  upon  R.  M.  P.  Forms  Nos.  1,  2,  3,  and  4. 

POST  OFFICE  DEPARTMENT  EXHIBIT  NO.  35.— CONSOLI- 
DATED STATEMENT  OF  SPACE  STATISTICS  OF  THE 
SOUTHERN  PACIFIC  CO. 

This  exhibit  recapitulates  b}'  route  totals  the  mformation 
as  to  space  submitted  by  the  Southern  Pacific  Co.  upon 
R.  M.  P.  Forms  Nos.  1,  2,  3,  and  4. 

POST  OFFICE  DEPARTMENT  EXHIBIT  NO.  36.— RECAPIT- 
ULATION OF  R.  M.  P.  FORM  NO.  301,  CONSOLIDATED 
STATEMENT  OF  TRACK  MILEAGE,  TRAIN  MILEAGE, 
CAR  MILEAGE  AND  CAR-FOOT  MILEAGE,  BY  CLASSES 
OF  SERVICE. 

This  exhibit  recapitulates  for  571  railroad  companies  or 
systems  the  consolidated  statements  of  track  mileage,  train 
mileage,  car  mileage,  and  car-foot  mileage  of  the  passenger- 
train  service  operated  during  the  period  March  27  to 
April  30,  1917,  inclusive;  and  the  car-foot  mileage  classified 
as  to  passenger  service,  miscellaneous  service,  express  serv- 
ice, authorized  mail  service,  unauthorized  space  claimed 
in  connection  with  mail  service,  unused  space  claimed  in 
connection  with  mail  service,  and  all  other  unused  space, 
classified  as  between  full  cars  and  mixed  cars.  In  con- 
nection with  this  exhibit  an  addendum  was  subsequently 
submitted  as  part  of  Exhibit  No.  44,  which  corrected  the 
totals  as  shown  by  Exhibit  No.  36.  These  corrected 
totals  are  as  follows : 

Track  mileage 232, 462 

Train  mileage 54, 244,  391 

Car  mileage 302,  086, 158 

Car-foot  mileage,  total  of  all  eerA-ices 19,  032,  772,  207 


71 


The  total  of  the  subdivisions  of  the  car-foot  mileage  and 
the  percentages  of  each  to  the  whole  are  as  follows : 


Subdivisions. 

Percentage 
Car-foot  miles.         of  the 
whole. 

12,602,053,310  ' 

1,226,853,687 

Total 

13,828,906,997  ]             72.66 

Miscellaneous,  full  cars  — 
Miscellaneous,  mixed  cars . 


.1  394,216,32! 

.1  122,294,89: 


516,511,221 


Express,  full  cars  . . . 
Express,  mixed  cars  . 


Authorized  mail,  full  railway  post-ofTice  cars . 

Authorized  mail,  full  storage  cars 

Authorized  mail,  mixed  cars 


Total. 


Unauthorized  space  claimed  in  connection  with  mail  in  full 


Unauthorized  space  claimed  in  connection  with  mail  in 

mixed  cars 

Unused  space  claimed  in  connection  with  mail  service 

AH  other  unused  space 


Total 

Grand  total . 


2,336,137,576 


463,563,336 
264,407,441 
.592,338,086 


1,320,308,863 


.32,212,004 

75, 287, 660 
216,233,004 
707,174,882 


2,772,207 


5.42 
100.00 


POST  OFFICE  DEPARTMENT  EXHIBIT  NO.  37.  -STATE- 
MENT SHOWING  ANALYSIS  OF  EXPRESS  MATTER 
CARRIED  BY  ALL  EXPRESS  COMPANIES  AS  COV- 
ERED BY  WAYBILLS  DATED  APRIL  2,  6,  12,  17, 
21,    AND    25,    1917. 

This  exhibit  shows  for  each  of  the  classifications  of  ex- 
press matter  the  number  of  transactions,  the  weight  in 
pounds  and  tons,  pound-miles,  ton-miles,  revenue,  revenue 
per  ton-mile,  payments  to  railroads  in  total  and  per  ton- 
mile,  average  distance  hauled  per  ton,  average  weight  per 
shipment,  average  revenue  per  shipment  and  per  pound, 
tabulated  from  wa3^bills  dated  April  2,  6,  12,  17,  21,  and 
25,  1917,  handled  by  the  American,  Adams,  Great  North- 
ern, Northern,  Southern,  Western,  and  Wells  Fargo  Ex- 
press Cos.  The  exhibit  consists  of  four  parts— (1)  with 
the  revenues  on  basis  of  charges  as  made  to  the  public  for 
the  six  days'  business;  (2)  with  the  revenues  on  basis  of 
charges  as  made  to  the  public  plus  10  per  cent  in  order  to 


illustrate  the  effect  of  the  increase  in  rates  effective  in  July, 
1918,  covering  the  six  days'  hnsiness;  (3)  based  on  revenue 
on  basis  of  cliarges  made  to  the  public  and  covering  the 
month  of  April,  1917;  (4)  based  on  revenues  on  basis  of 
charges  as  made  to  the  public  plus  10  per  cent,  covering 
the  month  of  April,  1917.  The  payments  to  railroads  per 
ton-mile  shown  by  Part  1  of  this  exhibit  for  the  several 
classifications  of  express  matter  are  as  follows: 


First  class,  or  higher,  L.  C.  L  . 

Second  class,  L.  C.  L 

All  other  freight  food  and  drink  L.C.L 

All  other  freight  other  than  food  and  drink,  L.  C.  L . 


Total  L.C.L 

First  class,  C.  L 

Second  class,  C.  L 

All  other  freight  food  and  drink,  C.  L 

All  other  freight  other  than  food  and  drink,  C.  L. 


Total  C.  L. 


Grand  total  C.  L.  and  L.  C.  L 

Total  of  groups  Nos.  2,  4,  7,  and  8. 


3.27 
2.31 
L22 
2.27 


4.50 
3.43 


POST  OFFICE  DEPARTMENT  EXHIBIT  NO.  38.  STATE- 
MENT OF  ANNUAL  RATES  OF  PAY.  ETC.,  ON  FORMER 
WEIGHT  BASIS  RAILROAD  MAIL  ROUTES  COVERED 
BY  ROUTES  STATED  UPON  SPACE  BASIS,  AND  OF 
ROUTES  CONTINUED  ON  WEIGHT  BASIS.  AND  OF 
RATES  OF  PAY  ALLOWABLE  ON  BASIS  OF  WEIGHTS 
TAKEN   DURING    STATISTICAL   PERIOD. 

This  exhibit  shows  for  each  railroad  company  carrj'ing 
the  mails  the  numbers  of  space  routes;  the  numbers  of 
former  weight  routes  or  parts  of  routes  covered  by  such 
space  routes  with  their  termini  and  length;  the  year  the 
mails  were  last  weighed  on  such  former  weight  routes;  the 
average  daily  weight  of  mails  ascertained  from  such  weigh- 
ings; the  annual  rate  of  pay  for  transportation  and  railway 
post-office  car  service  as  adjusted  under  the  provisions  of 
the  act  of  1873  and  amending  acts,  based  upon  the  average 
daily  weights  of  mails  taken  at  the  last  weighing  on  such 
routes;  the  average  daily  weight  of  mails  as  ascertained  bj^ 
the  special  weighhig,  March  27  to  April  30,  1917;  and  the 


annual  rate  of  pay  applicable  under  the  provisions  of  the 
act  of  1873  and  amending  acts,  to  such  weights  of  mails 
and  for  railway  post-office  cars.  It  also  shows  for  routes 
continued  upon  the  weight  basis  of  payment  the  same 
character  of  information.  The  results  for  all  railroad  com- 
panies are  shown  to  be  as  follows: 

Annual  rate  of  pay  under  adjustments  upon  the  weight 
basis  under  the  provisions  of  the  act  of  1873  and 
amending  acts : 

Transportation $58, 186,  630.  27 

Railway  post-office  cars 3,  977,  675.  03 

Total 62, 164,  305.  30 

Annual  rate  of  pay  applicable  to  weights  of  mail  ascer- 
tained by  special  weighing.  Mar.  27  to  Apr.  30,  1917: 

Transportation 65,  569,  234.  07 

Railway  post-office  cars 3,  977,  675.  03 

Total 69,  546,  909. 10 

POST  OFFICE  DEPARTMENT  EXHIBIT  NO.  39-IlECA- 
PITULATION  OF  FORM  R.  M.  P.  NO.  1.— STATE- 
MENT OF  COMPLETE  OPERATION  OF  TRAINS  AND 
OF  FULL  CARS  THEREIN  USED  EXCLUSIVELY 
FOR  PASSENGER,  MISCELLANEOUS,  AND  EXPRESS 
SERVICES. 

This  exhibit  recapitulates  for  571  railroad  companies  the 
data  reported  by  them  of  train-miles,  car-miles,  and  car-foot 
miles  for  all  passenger  trains  operated  by  them  during  the 
period  March  27  to  April  30,  1917;  and  of  the  car-miles 
and  car-foot  miles  of  full  cars  used  exclusively  for  the 
passenger  service  (including  baggage  cars),  miscellaneous 
service,  and  express  service,  and  operated  in  passenger 
trains  during  the  same  period. 

Subsequent  to  the  submission  of  Exhibit  No.  39  an 
addendum  to  the  same  was  submitted  as  part  of  Exhibit 
No.  44,  and  the  corrected  results  as  shown  by  this  ad- 
dendum are  as  follows: 

Complete  operation  of  trains: 

Train-miles 54.  244,  391 

Car-miles 302,  086, 158 

Car-foot  miles 19,  032.  772,  207 


74 

Full  cars  used  exclusively  for — 

Passenger  service  (including  baggage  cars) : 

Car-miles 192.  113,  438 

Car-foot  miles 12,  602,  053.  310 

Miscellaneous  service : 

Car-miles 8.  .375,  799 

Car-foot  miles 394.  216,  329 

Express  service : 

Car-miles 28,  989,  651 

<  "ar-foot  miles 1,  642.  093.  2S3 

POST  OFFICE  DEPARTMENT  EXHIBIT  NO.  40— RECA- 
PITULATION OF  FORM  R.  M.  P.  NO.  2.— STATEMENT 
OF  COMPLETE  OPERATION  OF  FULL  RAILWAY 
POST-OFFICE    CARS    AND    MAIL-STORAGE    CARS. 

This  exhibit  recapitulates  for  70  railroad  companies 
which  operated  full  railway  post-ofTice  cars  and  mail- 
storage  cars  the  data  reported  by  them  as  to  the  car-miles 
and  car-foot  miles  of  full  railway  post-ofhce  cars  and  mail- 
storage  cars  authorized,  and  of  the  excess  over  the  author- 
ized space,  and  unauthorized  and  unused  space  claimed  in 
connection  with  the  operation  of  full  railway  post-office 
cars  and  mail-storage  cars,  operated  during  the  period 
March  27  to  April  30,  1917. 

Subsequent  to  the  submission  of  Exhibit  No.  40,  there 
was  prepared  and  submitted  an  addendum  thereto  as  part 
of  Exhibit  No.  44,  and  the  corrected  results  shown  b}'  this 
addendum  are  as  follows: 

Full  railway  post-office  cars  authorized : 

Car-miles 7.  712.  325 

Car-foot  miles  (authorized  service) 463.  563,  336 

Car-foot  miles  (excess  over  authorized  space) 14.  772,  451 

Full  railway  post-office  cars  operated  but  not  authorized  for 
mail  service : 

Car-miles 78.  758 

Car-foot  miles 4.  751,  818 

Mail-storage  cars : 

Car-miles  authorized 4,  569,  476 

Car-foot  miles  (authorized  service) 264,  407,  441 

Car-foot  miles  (excess  over  authorized  space) 5.  407,  585 

Mail-storage  cars  operated    but    not   authorized    for    mail 
service: 

Car-miles 119, 163 

Car-foot  miles 7,  280, 150 


75 

POST  OFFICE  DEPARTMENT  EXHIBIT  NO.  41— RECA- 
PITULATION OF  FORM  R.  M.  P.  NO.  3.— STATEMENT 
OF  THE  OPERATION  OF  MIXED  CARS  (INCLUDING 
COMBINATION  CARS  AND  ALL  OTHER  CARS .  CAR- 
RYING MORE  THAN  ONE  CLASS  OF  TRAFFIC)  AND 
THE  DIVISION  OF  THE  SPACE  THEREIN  TO  THE 
PASSENGER,  BAGGAGE,  MISCELLANEOUS,  EX- 
PRESS, AND  AUTHORIZED  MAIL  SERVICE,  AND 
UNAUTHORIZED     AND     UNUSED     SPACE. 

This  exhibit  recapitulates  for  571  raikoad  companies  the 
data  reported  by  them  as  to  the  car-miles  and  car-foot 
miles  of  all  mixed  cars  operated  during  the  period  March 
27  to  April  30,  1917,  with  the  car-foot  miles  of  such  opera- 
tion performed  in  passenger  service,  baggage  service,  mis- 
cellaneous service,  express  service,  authorized  mail  service, 
unauthorized  and  unused  space  claimed  in  connection  with 
mail  service,  and  all  other  unused  space. 

Subsequent  to  the  submission  of  Exhibit  No.  41,  an 
addendum  was  prepared  to  this  exhibit  and  submitted  as 
part  of  Exhibit  No.  44.  The  corrected  results  shown  by 
the  addendum  are  as  follows : 

Operation  of  all  mixed  cars: 

Car-miles 60, 127,  548 

Car-foot  miles 3,  634,  226,  504 

Parts  of  mixed  cars  used  for : 

Passenger  service:  Car-foot  miles 568,  722,  931 

Per  cent  of  whole,  15.65. 

Baggage  service :  Car-foot  miles 658, 130,  756 

Per  cent  of  whole,  18.11. 

Miscellaneous  service:  Car-foot  miles 122,  294,  892 

Per  cent  of  whole,  3.36. 

Express  service :  Car-foot  miles 694,  044,  293 

Per  cent  of  whole,  19.10. 

Authorized  mail  service:  Car-foot  miles 592,  338,  086 

Per  cent  of  whole,  16.30. 
Unauthorized  space  claimed  in  connection  with  mail 

8er\'ice :  Car-foot  miles 75,  287,  660 

Per  cent  of  whole,  2.07. 
Unused  space  claimed  in  connection  with  mail  serv- 
ice: Car-foot  miles 115,  031,  536 

Per  cent  of  whole,  3.17. 

All  other  unused  space:  Car-foot  miles 707, 174,  882 

Per  cent  of  whole,  19.46. 
Unused  space  in  full  cars  claimed  as  necessary  opera- 
tion in  lieu  of  lesser  mail  space:  Car-foot  miles 101,  201,  468 

Per  cent  of  whole,  2.78. 


(6 

POST  OFFICE    DEPARTMENT   EXHIBIT  NO.  42  -RECAPIT- 
ULATION  OF   FORM  R.    M.    P.    NO.    4.— STATEMENT  OF 
OPERATION  OF  RAILWAY  POST-OFFICE  APARTMENTS 
IN     COMBINATION     CARS    AND    OF     MAIL    STORAGE 
SPACE,  CLOSED-POUCH  SPACE,  AND  UNAUTHORIZED 
AND  UNUSED  SPACE  IN  MIXED  CARS. 
Tills  exliibit  shows  for  571  railroad  companies  the  data 
reported  by  them  as  to  the  car-foot  miles  operated  in  con- 
nection with  railway  post-ofhce  apartments  in  combination 
cars,  authorized  space  and  unauthorized  space  claimed  in 
connection  therewith;   operation  of  mail  storage  space  in 
mixed  cars  and  unauthorized  space  claimed  in  connection 
therewith;  and  operation  of  closed-pouch  space  in  mixed 
cars  and  unauthorized  space  claimed  in  connection  there- 
with. 

Subsequent  to  the  submission  of  Exhibit  No.  42,  an  ad- 
dendum thereto  was  prepared  and  submitted  as  part  of 
Exhibit  No.  44,  and  the  corrected  totals  as  shown  by  the 
addendum  are  as  follows : 

Railway  post-office  apartments  in  combination  cars:  Car-foot  miles. 

Authorized  space 484, 114,  751 

Excess  over  authorized  space 154,  746,  900 

Unauthorized  space  claimed  in  connection  therewith. . .  45,  244,  090 

Total 684, 105,  741 

Mail  storage  space  in  mixed  cars: 

Authorized  space f'2, 141,  479 

Unauthorized  space  claimed  in  connection  therewith. .     64,  872,  350 

Total 127,013,829 

Closed-pouch  space  in  mixed  cars: 

Authorized  space 46,  081,  856 

Unauthorized  space  claimed  in  connection  therewith. .     26,  657,  324 

Total 72,  739, 180 

Grand  total 883,858,750 

POST     OFFICE     DEPARTMENT     EXHIBIT     NO.     43.— CON- 
SOLIDATED     STATEMENT      OF      SPACE      STATISTICS 
OF     THE     NEW     YORK,     NEW     HAVEN    &    HARTFORD 
RAILROAD   CO. 
This  exhibit  recapitulates  by  route  totals  the  informa- 
tion as  to  space  submitted  by  the  New  York,  New  Haven 
&  Hartford  Railroad  Co.  upon  R.  M.  P.  Forms  Nos.  1,  2, 
3,  and  4. 


77 

POST  OFFICE  DEPARTMENT  EXHIBIT  NO.  44.— AD- 
DENDA TO  EXHIBITS   NOS.    36,   39,   40,   41,   42. 

This  exhibit  is  fully  explained  under  Exhibits  Nos.  36, 
39,  40,  41,  and  42,  respectively. 

POST  OFFICE  DEPARTMENT  EXHIBIT  NO.  45.— STATE- 
MENT SHOWING  THE  ESTIMATED  ANNUAL  COM- 
PENSATION AT  THE  SPACE  BASIS  RATES  OF  PAY, 
UPON  THE  RAILROAD  MAIL  ROUTES  CONTINUED 
UPON  THE  WEIGHT  BASIS  OF  PAY,  BASED  UPON 
THE  SERVICE  PERFORMED  UNDER  THE  WEIGHT 
BASIS  OF  PAY,  DURING  THE  STATISTICAL  PERIOD 
MARCH   27   TO   APRIL   30,    1917,   INCLUSIVE. 

This  exhibit  shows  for  each  railroad  company  whose  mail 
routes  were  stated  upon  the  weight  basis  of  pay  the  esti- 
mated annual  rate  of  line  pay,  initial  and  terminal  allow- 
ance, and  total  pay  that  they  would  have  received  had 
the  routes  been  stated  upon  the  space  basis  of  pay,  based 
upon  the  service  performed  during  the  statistical  period 
March  27  to  April  30,  1917,  inclusive.  The  totals  for  all 
railroad  companies  shown  by  this  exhibit  are  as  follows: 

Estimated  annual  rate  of  line  pay 8351,  509. 14 

Estimated  annual  initial  and  terminal  allowance 393,  652.  01 

Total 745. 161. 15 

Annual  rate  of  pay  of  record  on  the  routes  embraced  in  this 
exhibit  under  the  weight  basis  as  of  Mar.  27,  1917 1,  072,  498.  68 

POST  OFFICE  DEPARTMENT  EXHIBIT  NO.  46.— STATE- 
MENT SHOWING  THE  ESTIMATED  ANNUAL  RATE  OF 
PAY  THAT  WOULD  HAVE  ACCRUED,  BASED  UPON 
THE  SERVICE  IN  EFFECT  ON  MARCH  27,  1917 
(POST  OFFICE  DEPARTMENT  EXHIBIT  NO.  5),  AT 
RATES  FOR  LINE  PAY  AND  INITIAL  AND  TER- 
MINAL ALLOWANCES  PRO  RATA  OF  THE  MAXI- 
MUM RATES  FIXED  BY  LAW  FOR  60-FOOT  FULL 
RAILWAY  POST-OFFICE  CAR  AND  STORAGE  CAR 
SERVICES. 

This  exhibit  shows  for  each  of  the  classes  of  service 
authorized  under  the  space-basis  system  of  payment 
(separated  as  to  nonland-grant  and  land-grant),  the  esti- 
mated annual  rate  of  line  pay  and  initial  and  terminal 
allowance  that  would  have  accrued  in  each  class  of  service 
at  rates  pro  rata  of  the  maximum  rates  fixed  by  the  act  of 


78 

July  28,  1916,  for  railway  post-office  car  and  storage  car 
services.  The  results  of  tliis  exhibit  are  shown  as  follows: 
Annual  miles  of  service  (P.  0.  I).  Exhibit  No.  5) 557, 151,  915.  99 

Estimated  annual  rate  of  line  pay $51,  440,  482.  til 

Estimated  annual  rate  of  initial  and  terminal  allowance. .       4,  500,  592.  22 

Total 55,  941,  074.  83 

POST  OFFICE  DEPARTMENT  EXHIBIT  NO.  47.— CLASSI- 
FICATION AND  DESCRIPTION  OF  THE  CHARACTER 
OF  THE  UNAUTHORIZED  AND  UNUSED  SPACE  RE- 
PORTED IN  CONNECTION  WITH  THE  MAIL  SERV- 
ICE  ON  R.   M.    P.    FORMS   NOS.    2   AND   4. 

This  exhibit  describes  in  detail,  under  appropriate  sym- 
bols, the  character  of  the  several  kinds  of  excess,  unauthor- 
ized, and  unused  space  reported  by  the  railroads  in  con- 
nection with  the  mail  service  on  R.  M.  P.  Forms  Nos.  2 
and  4.  The  descriptions  of  the  various  symbols  are  as 
follows: 

A.  Full  E,.  P.  O.  car,  full  mail  storage  car,  R.  P.  O. 
apartment  in  combination  car,  unit  of  mail  storage  space 
in  combination  car,  or  unit  of  closed-pouch  space  in 
combination  car,  was  authorized  between  points  "A" 
and  "B,"  but  the  full  car  or  car  containing  the  unit  of 
authorized  space  was  run  by  the  railroad  company  beyond 
the  authorized  distance  between  "B"  and  "C."  Excess 
unauthorized.  The  full  space  in  the  full  car  or  mail  apart- 
ment, or  the  full  space  in  the  unit  of  storage  or  closed- 
pouch  authorization  for  the  excess  or  unauthorized  opera- 
tion, was  reported  or  entered  in  connection  with  the  mails. 

AE.  R.  P.  O.  apartment  in  combination  car  was  author- 
ized. The  railroad  company  ran  an  apartment  of  larger 
size  than  that  required  to  fulfill  the  authorization.  Where 
such  larger  apartment  was  run  by  the  company  over  a  dis- 
tance unauthorized  for  mail  service,  the  railroad  company 
reported  in  connection  with  the  mails  the  excess  space  and 
its  mileage  over  the  unauthorized  distance. 

B.  Full  R.  P.  O.  car,  full  mail  storage  car,  R.  P.  O. 
apartment  in  combination  car,  unit  of  mail  storage  space 
in  combination  car,  or  unit  of  closed-pouch  space  in  com- 
bination car,  was  authorized  six  or  less  times  a  week,  but 
the  full  car  or  car  containing  the  unit  of  authorized  space 


79 

was  run  by  the  railroad  company  on  other  days  of  the 
week.  Excess  unauthorized.  The /uZZ  space  in  the  full  car 
or  apartment,  or  the  full  space  in  the  unit  of  storage  or 
closed-pouch  authorization  for  the  excess  operation,  was 
reported  or  entered  in  connection  with  the  mails. 

BE.  R.  P.  O.  15-foot  apartment  in  combination  car  was 
authorized.  The  railroad  company  ran  an  apartment  of 
larger  size  than  that  required  to  fulfill  the  authorization. 
Where  such  larger  apartment  was  run  by  the  company  on 
a  day  or  days  unauthorized  for  mail  service,  the  railroad 
company  reported  in  connection  with  the  mails  the  excess 
space  and  its  mileage  for  the  unauthorized  trips. 

C.  (1)  R.  P.  O.  apartment  in  combination  car,  unit  of 
mail  storage  space  in  combination  car,  or  unit  of  closed- 
pouch  space  in  combination  car,  was  authorized  daily,  one 
train  each  way,  but  the  car  containing  the  apartment  or 
unit  of  authorized  space  was  run  by  the  railroad  com- 
pany, between  the  points  authorized,  in  other  trains  also. 
Excess  unauthorized. 

(2)  R.  P.  O.  apartment  in  combination  car  was  author- 
ized between  "A"  and  ''B,"  but  the  car  containing  the 
apartment  was  run  by  the  railroad  company  in  other  trains 
and  beyond  "B"  to  "C"  over  trackage  covered  by  another 
mail  route  or  trackage  over  which  no  mail  route  was  stated. 
Excess  unauthorized. 

The  full  space  in  the  apartment  or  unit  of  mail  storage 
or  closed-pouch  authorization  for  the  excess  operation  was 
reported  or  entered  in  connection  with  the  mail. 

CE.  R.  P.  O.  apartment  in  combination  car  was  author- 
ized on  certain  trains.  The  railroad  company  ran  an  apart- 
ment of  larger  size  than  required  to  fulfill  the  authoriza- 
tion. Where  such  larger  apartment  was  run  by  the  com- 
pany on  other  trains  unauthorized  for  mail  service,  the 
railroad  company  reported  in  connection  with  the  mails 
the  excess  space  and  its  mileage  for  the  unauthorized 
trains. 

D.  R.  P.  O.  apartment-car  service  was  discontinued  on 
a  route  and  storage  space  or  closed-pouch  space  author- 
ized in  lieu  thereof.  The  railroad  company  continued  to 
run  the  apartment-car  unauthorized   by  the  department 


8') 

and  reported  the  excess  mileaj^o  for  the  full  space  in  the 
apartment  car  in  connection  with  the  mails. 

E.  A  unit  of  storage  s])ace  or  closed-pouch  space  was 
authorized  on  a  given  train  for  part  of  the  number  of  days 
of  the  week  and  a  lesser  unit  of  storage  space  or  closed- 
pouch  space  was  authorized  on  the  remaining  days  of  the 
week.  For  the  da.vs  and  the  mileage  on  which  the  lesser 
unit  was  authorized  there  was  re])orted  or  entered  on  the 
reports  in  connection  with  the  mails  the  mileage  for  the 
difference  between  the  lesser  authorization  and  the  greater 
authorization  which  was  run  on  the  other  days  of  the  week. 

F.  The  railroad  company  ran  "deadhead"  a  combina- 
tion car  containing  an  unused  mail  apartment  or  may  run 
such  car  in  an  '  'extra  "  train.  No  space  in  the  car  was  used 
by  the  company  or  authorized  or  used  for  the  mails,  nor 
was  the  car  operated  in  connection  with  an  authorized 
movement  of  a  mail  apartment.  The  full  space  in  the  mail 
apartment  for  the  excess  operation  was  reported  by  the 
railroad  company  in  connection  with  the  mails. 

H.  Emergency  service  by  units  of  mail  storage  space  or 
closed-pouch  space  in  combination  cars  one  way  between 
given  points  was  authorized.  The  operation  of  such  space 
for  the  balance  of  train  run  or  for  the  distance  of  the  re- 
turn movement  has  been  claimed  and  entered  in  connec- 
tion with  the  mails. 

K.  A  15-foot  or  a  30-foot  apartment  in  combination  car 
or  unit  of  mail  storage  space  was  authorized,  but  the  rail- 
road company,  for  its  own  convenience,  furnished  and 
operated  in  fulfillment  of  such  apartment  authorization  a 
full  railway  post-office  car  or  full  storage  car,  baggage  car, 
or  combination  car,  and  reported  and  entered  the  mileage 
for  the  excess  space,  the  difference  between  the  apartment 
or  mail  storage  space  authorization  and  the  length  of  the 
car  furnished,  for  the  distance  authorized. 

M.  A  unit  of  storage  space  or  closed-pouch  space  was 
authorized  between  points  "A"  and  "B"  and  a  lesser 
unit  of  storage  or  closed-pouch  space  was  authorized  for  a 
farther  distance  by  the  same  train  between  "B"  and  "C." 
The  railroad  company  reported,  or  there  was  entered  in 
connection  with  the  mails,  the  mileage  for  the  difference 


SI 

between  the  greater  unit  and  the  lesser  unit  for  the  distance 
from'^B"  to  ''C." 

R.  A  unit  of  storage  or  closed-iioucii  space  was  authorized 
in  one  direction  between  points  on  a  raih-oad  route.  The 
mileage  for  the  full  space  of  the  storage  or  closed-pouch 
unit  for  the  return  movement  was  reported  or  entered  in 
connection  with  the  mails. 

RM.  A  unit  of  storage  or  closed-pouch  space  was  author- 
ized in  one  direction  between  given  points  on  a  route  and  a 
lesser  unit  of  storage  or  closed-pouch  space  was  authorized 
in  the  opposite  direction  between  the  same  points.  The 
mileage  for  the  difference  between  the  lesser  authorization 
and  the  greater  authorization  of  space  for  the  distance  of 
the  return  movement  was  reported  or  entered  in  con- 
nection with  the  mails. 

S.  A  unit  of  mail  storage  space  or  closed-pouch  space  was 
authorized  in  one  direction  between  points  on  a  route, 
which  distance  included  a  spur.  The  mileage  for  the  closed- 
pouch  unit  for  the  return  train  movement  over  the  spur 
was  reported  or  entered  in  connection  with  the  mails. 

X.  R.  P.  O.  apartment  in  combination  car  was  author- 
ized between  points  "A"  and  "B, "  but  the  railroad  com- 
pany operated  the  car  unauthorized  and  unused  for  mails 
for  the  farther  distance  between  '  'B  "  and  "  C. "  Company 
has  claimed  concurrent  unauthorized  operation  of  a  closed- 
pouch  space  or  storage  space  unit  over  same  mileage.  The 
mileage  for  the  closed-pouch  or  storage  space  unit  for  the 
distance  between  "B"  and  "C"  was  reported  or  has  been 
entered  in  connection  with  the  mails. 

DIS.  The  railroad  company  entered  upon  Form  R.  M.  P. 
4  in  the  column  provided  for  authorized  mail  movements, 
mileage  claims  for  emergency  service  both  in  mail  storage 
space  and  closed-pouch  space.  When  the  records  of  the 
department  have  shown  that  these  claims  were  disallowed 
the  entries  have  been  transferred  to  column  23,  Form 
4,  for  mail  storage  space  and  to  column  31,  Form  4,  for 
closed-pouch  space  and  have  been  included  in  column  21, 
Form  301. 

The  amounts  of  car-foot  miles,  classified  under  these 
respective  symbols,  are  recapitulated  by  railroad  com- 
panies in  Exhibit  No.  48. 

122698—19 6 


82 

POST  OFFICE  DEPARTMENT  EXHIBIT  NO.  48.— STATE- 
MENT SHOWING  THE  CLASSIFICATION  OF  EXCESS, 
UNAUTHORIZED,  AND  UNUSED  SPACE  REPORTED 
BY  THE  RAILROAD  COMPANIES  ON  R.  M.  P.  FORMS 
NOS.  2  AND  4,  AS  HAVING  BEEN  OPERATED  IN 
CONNECTION   WITH   THE    MAIL    SERVICE. 

This  exhibit  rccapitidates  by  railroad  companies  report- 
ing such  space  the  car-foot  miles  of  excess,  unauthorized, 
and  unused  space  reported  on  R.  M.  P.  Forms  Nos.  2  and 
4  as  having  been  operated  in  connection  with  the  mail 
service,  as  classified  by  the  department  under  appropriate 
symbols,  according  to  the  character  of  the  space  and  opera- 
tion. (For  explanation  of  these  symbols  see  Exhibit  No. 
47.)  The  total  results  for  all  railroad  companies  shown 
on  this  exhibit  are  as  follows: 


Classification. 

Car  foot 
miles. 

Per  cent  to 
whole. 

Excess  over  authorized  space  in  full  railway  post-office  cars — 

15,109,636 
5,407,585 

75,846,260 

30,780,198 

2,227,680 

15,678,448 

2,072,063 

13,148,811 

994,672 

1,064,702 

1,129,061 

9,428,531 

1,624,158 

100,642,868 

4,175,116 

39,064,726 

4,203,758 

101,530 

457,580 

912,227 

4.66 
1.67 

Excess  over  authorized  space  in  railway  post  office  apartments 

23.40 

j^                                            

9.50 

^g                                                  

.69 

4.84 

BE                                      

.64 

Q                                                                                 

4.00 

.31 

J)                                                         

.33 

E                                                                            

.35 

2.91 

.50 

}^                                                              

31.05 

f^J                                                                                        

1.29 

12.05 

jiM                                    

1.30 

g                                                  

.03 

.14 

DIS  

.28 

'JlQ|;a,J                                                                                   

324,069,610 

100.00 

POST  OFFICE  DEPARTMENT  EXHIBIT  NO.  49.— STATE- 
MENT SHOWING  ESTIMATED  AVERAGE  DENSITY 
OF  LOADING  IN  MAIL  SERVICE  COMPARED  WITH 
ESTIMATED  AVERAGE  DENSITY  OF  LOADING  IN 
EXPRESS    SERVICE. 

This  exhibit  submits  an  estimate  of  the  average  density 
of  loading  per  linear  foot  in  the  mail  service  and  the  estimated 
average  density  of  loading  per  linear  foot  in  the  express  serv- 
ice,computed  as  to  mail  service  from  data  shown  in  Post  Office 


83 

Department  Exhibits  Nos.  11  and  36,  and  as  to  express 
service  from  data  shown  in  Post  Office  Department  Ex- 
hibits Nos.  36  and  37.  The  computations  show  the  esti- 
mated average  weight  of  mail  per  hnear  foot  carried  to  be 
111.70  pounds  and  the  estimated  average  weight  of  express 
per  linear  foot  carried  to  be  206.91  pounds. 

POST  OFFICE  DEPARTMENT  EXHIBIT  NO.  50.— STATE- 
MENT SHOWING  THE  AVERAGE  LOAD  PER  LINEAR 
FOOT  CARRIED  IN  THE  SEVERAL  AUTHORIZED 
UNITS  OF  CAR  SPACE  BASED  UPON  RETURN  OF 
THE  SPECIAL  WEIGHING,  WEEK  OF  APRIL  12  TO 
18,   INCLUSIVE,    1917. 

This  exhibit  presents  the  results  of  a  computation  of  the 
average  load  of  mails  per  linear  foot  carried  in  each  of  the 
units  of  service  authorized  under  the  space-basis  system, 
computed  from  the  average  loads  for  such  units  of  service  as 
shown  in  Post  Office  Department  Exhibit  No.  12.  The 
computed  average  loads  per  linear  foot  are  as  follows: 

Pounds. 

60- foot  full  railway  post-office  cars 84.  65 

30-foot  apartment  railway  post-office  cars 55.  83 

15-foot  apartment  railway  post-office  cars 35.  73 

60-foot  storage  cars 218.  56 

30-foot  storage  space 219. 16 

15-foot  storage  space 248.  40 

7-foot  storage  space 285.  42 

3-ioot  storage  space 265.  00 

POST  OFFICE  DEPARTMENT  EXHIBIT  NO.  51.— STATE- 
MENT SHOWING  MILES  OF  SERVICE  AUTHORIZED 
IN  THE  SEVERAL  UNITS  OF  SERVICE  ON  MARCH 
27,  1917  (POST  OFFICE  DEPARTMENT  EXHIBIT 
NO.    5)    EQUATED   TO    60-FOOT    CAR-MILES. 

This  exhibit  shows  the  equated  60-foot  car-miles  of  the 
service  authorized  under  the  space-basis  system  in  the  several 
units  of  service  as  of  March  27,  1917,  based  upon  the  miles 
of  service  authorized  on  that  date,  as  shown  in  Post  Office 
Department  Exhibit  No.  5,  together  with  the  percentage 


84 

of  each  class  of  service  to  the  whole, 
to  be  as  follows: 


The  results  are  shown 


Units  of  service. 

Car-miles. 

Per  cent. 

COfoot  full  railway  pfist-office  cars 

86,145,493.41 
72,576,49.5.79 
24, 241, 3%.  48 
50, 132, 158  05 
5,376,872  79 
3,908,430.44 
1,645, 606.  .36 
507,057.26 
2,197,479.83 
5,464,316.77 

34  16 

30-foot  storage  space 

2  13 

i5-Iool  storage  st)aoe 

1  55 

7-foot  storage  space . . 

65 

7-lool  close  d-pouch  space 

87 

Total 

252,195,307.18 

POST  OFFICE  DEPARTMENT  EXHIBIT  NO.  52.— STATE- 
MENT SHOWING  THE  ESTIMATED  TON-MILES  PER- 
FORMED IN  THE  SEVERAL  UNITS  OF  AUTHORIZED 
SPACE  IN  EFFECT  MARCH  27,  1917,  AND  RESULT- 
ANT RATES  OF  PAY  PER  TON  PER  MILE  BASED 
ON  AUTHORIZED  ANNUAL  RATE  OF  PAY  MARCH 
27,  1917  (POST  OFFICE  DEPARTMENT  EXHIBIT 
NO.  6). 

This  exhibit  shows  for  each  class  of  service  authorized 
on  the  space-basis  system  of  pay,  the  annual  miles  of  service 
authorized  on  March  27,  1917  (see  Exhibit  No.  5),  the 
average  loads  of  each  (see  Exhibit  No.  12),  the  estimated 
ton-miles  of  each  class,  the  per  cent  of  each  class  to  the 
whole,  the  annual  rate  of  pay  March  27,  1917  (see  Ex- 
hibit No.  5),  and  the  ton-mile  rate  of  pay  for  each  class. 
The  estimated  ton-miles,  the  per  cents,  and  the  ton-mile 
rates  of  pay  for  each  unit  of  service  and  for  the  total  service 
are  shown  to  be  as  follows: 


Umts  of  service. 

Estimated 
ton-miles. 

Per  cent  of 
whole. 

Ton-mile 
rate  of  pay. 

218,766,480 
121,565,630 
25,986,777 
328, 716, 560 
35,352,938 
29,125,623 
14,091,092 
4,031,105 

}    48,454,510 

26.48 
14.72 
3.14 
39.79 
4.28 
3.53 
1.71 
.49 
5.86 

Cents. 

30-foot  apartment  railway  post-office  cars 

14  27 

15-)oot  apartment  railway  post-office  cars 

30  38 

30-foot  storage  space 

3  28 

3.07 

2.64 

3-foot  storage  space 

3  07 

Total  

826,090,715 

100.00 

1  7  23 

'  Average. 


85 

POST  OFFICE  DEPARTMENT  EXHIBIT  NO.  53.— STATE- 
MENT SHOWING  FOR  THE  MONTH  OF  APRIL,  1917, 
THE  OPERATION  OF  MAIL  STORAGE  CARS— OUT- 
BOUND TRIPS  PERFORMED  AND  ALLOWED;  RE- 
TURN LOADED  AND  EMPTY  TRIPS  PERFORMED 
AND  ALLOWED;  AND  RETURN  EMPTY  TRIPS  DUE 
WHICH  WERE  USED  BY  COMPANY  OR  NOT  PER- 
FORMED   AND    NOT   PAID   FOR. 

This  statement  shows  for  each  route  upon  which  units 
of  mail  storage  cars  were  authorized  dui'ing  the  month  of 
April,  1917,  the  number  of  trips  and  miles  of  service  of 
outbound  trips  of  such  cars  performed  and  for  which  pay- 
ment was  allowed;  the  number  of  trips  and  miles  of  serv- 
ice of  return  loaded  trips  in  such  cars  performed  and  for 
which  payment  was  allov%^ed;  the  number  of  trips  and  miles 
of  service  of  return  empty  trips  of  such  cars  performed  and 
for  which  payment  was  allowed;  and  the  number  of  trips 
and  miles  of  service  of  return  empty  trips  of  such  cars  due 
which  were  either  used  by  the  company  for  its  o^ii  pur- 
poses or  not  performed  and  for  which  payment  was  not 
allowed.  It  is  sho^Mi  by  this  exhibit  that  78.40  per  cent 
of  the  miles  of  service  of  outbound  trips  was  performed  in 
return  loaded  trips  for  which  payment  was  allowed,  that 
15.61  per  cent  of  the  miles  of  service  of  outbound  trips  was 
performed  in  empty  return  trips  paid  for,  and  that  5.99 
per  cent  of  the  miles  of  service  of  outboimd  trips  was  either 
used  by  the  company  in  the  return  direction  or  not  per- 
formed and  was  not  paid  for. 

POST  OFFICE  DEPARTMENT  fiXHIBIT  NO.  54.— STATE- 
MENT OF  THE  WEIGHT,  TON-MILES,  MAIL  PAY 
PER  ANNUM  AND  PER  TON-MILE  OF  SHIPMENTS 
OF  PERIODICAL  SECOND-CLASS  MAIL  MATTER  IN 
FAST-FREIGHT  TRAINS  AND  BY  STEAMSHIP,  FOR 
THE    FISCAL    YEAR    ENDED    JUNE    30,    1918. 

This  cxliibit  presents  complete  statistics  for  the  fiscal 
year  ended  Jmie  30,  1918,  of  the  shipments  of  periodical 
second-class  mail  matter  in  fast  freight  trains  and  by  steam- 
ship, the  results  being  as  follows: 
Fast- freight  trains: 

Total  weight  of  periodical  mails  shipped pounds. .  115.  442,  758 

Num! :>er  of  tons 57.  721 

Cost  of  transportation  and  cartage $773,  754.  27 

Average  ton-mile  cost cents. .  1.  518 

Average  haul  per  ton miles. .  883 


86 

Steamships: 

Total  weight  (if  periodical  mails  shipped pounds. .  4,  490,  48!) 

Number  of  tons 2,  249 

Cost  of  transportation  and  cartage $20,  806.  72 

Average  ton-mile  cost cents . .  .  519 

Average  haul  per  ton miles . .  1,  783 

POST  OFFICE  DEPARTMENT  EXHIBIT  NO.  55.— STATE- 
MENT SHOWING,  FOR  CERTAIN  SELECTED  RAIL- 
ROAD COMPANIES,  AND  REPRESENTING  AVERAGE 
CONDITIONS,  THE  MAXIMUM  AND  MINIMUM  NUM- 
BER OF  SACKS  AND  POUCHES  IN  CAR  AT  ANY 
ONE  TIME,  CARRIED  IN  UNITS  OF  STORAGE  SPACE 
AND  CLOSED-POUCH  SPACE  DURING  THE  WEEK  OF 
APRIL  12  TO  18,  INCLUSIVE,  1917,  AS  REPORTED  BY 
THE  RAILROAD  COMPANIES  ON  R.  M.  P.  FORM 
NO.  6. 

This  exhibit  shows  for  15  railroad  systems  located  in 
different  sections  of  the  country  the  maximiun  and  mini- 
mum number  of  sacks  or  pouches  at  any  one  time  carried 
in  authorized  units  of  storage  and  closed-pouch  space,  and 
such  emergency  units  as  were  authorized  in  the  same  trains 
during  the  week  April  12  to  18,  1917,  inclusive.  These 
figures  were  tabulated  from  the  reports  of  the  railroad  com- 
panies made  upon  R.  M.  P.  Form  No.  6. 

POST  OFFICE  DEPARTMENT  EXHIBIT  NO.  56.— STATE- 
MENT SHOWING  FOR  THE  MONTH  OF  APRIL,  1917, 
THE  TOTAL  PAY  RECEIVED  FROM  RAILROAD 
COMPANIES  BY  CONTRACTORS  FOR  CONVEYING 
THE  MAILS  BETWEEN  RAILROAD  STATIONS  AND 
POST  OFFICES,  AND  TRANSFERRING  MAILS  BE- 
TWEEN RAILROAD  STATIONS;  AND  BY  RAILROAD 
EMPLOYEES,  A  PART  OF  WHOSE  TIME  WAS  OCCU- 
PIED IN  THE  HANDLING  OF  THE  MAILS  BETWEEN 
RAILROAD  STATIONS  AND  POST  OFFICES  AND  BE- 
TWEEN RAILROAD  STATIONS,  AS  REPORTED  BY 
THE  RAILROAD  COMPANIES  ON  R.  M.  P.  FORM 
NO.  5;  AND  THE  PART  OF  THE  PAY  OF  SUCH  EM- 
PLOYEES   APPORTIONED   TO   THE    MAIL    SERVICE. 

Tliis  exhibit  shows  for  each  of  the  railroads  listed,  for  the 
month  of  April,  1917,  the  total  pay  of  contractors  employed 
by  railroad  companies  to  transport  the  mails  between  rail- 
road stations  and  post  offices  and  between  railroad  stations, 
the  total  pay  of  railroad  employees  handling  mails  between 


87 

railroad  stations  and  post  offices,  and  the  part  of  the  total  pay 
of  such  railroad  employees  apportioned  to  the  mail  service 
on  the  basis  of  thie  ratio  of  time  reported  by  the  railroads 
as  being  consumed  by  their  employees  in  the  discharge  of 
duties  connected  with  the  handling  of  the  mails  as  indicated, 
to  the  total  time  of  employment  of  such  employees.  This 
exhibit  is  a  tabulation  of  statistics  reported  by  the  rail- 
roads upon  R.  M.  P.  Form  No.  5  and,  for  the  companies 
represented,  gives  the  foUowmg  totals  for  all  such  railroad 
companies : 

Total  pay  of  railroad  contractors S32.  851.  58 

The  part  of  total  pay  of  railroad  employees  apportioned  to 

mail  service "I-  286.  94 


Total. 


104, 138.  52 


POST  OFFICE  DEPARTMENT  EXHIBIT  NO.  57.— STATE- 
MENT SHOWING  MILES  OF  TRAVEL  OF  EXPRESS 
OFFICIALS  AND  EMPLOYEES,  JOINT  EXPRESS  AND 
RAILROAD  EMPLOYEES,  AND  MAIL  OFFICIALS  AND 
EMPLOYEES,  WHILE  ON  DUTY  AND  PERFORMING 
CUSTOMARY  SERVICES,  AND  WHILE  OCCUPYING 
SEATS  IN  PASSENGER  COACHES  AND  OTHER  PAS- 
SENGER CARS,  AS  REPORTED  BY  THE  RAILROAD 
COMPANIES,    FOR   THE    MONTH    OF    APRIL,    1917. 

This  exhibit  shows  for  the  railroad  companies  listed  the 
miles  of  travel  of  express  officials  and  employees,  of  joint 
express  and  railroad  employees,  and  of  mail  officials  and 
employees  (1)  while  on  duty  and  performmg  customary 
services  in  express,  baggage,  or  mail  cars,  respectively;  (2) 
while  occupymg  seats  ui  passenger  coaches  and  other 
passenger  cars.    The  results  of  this  exhibit  are  as  follows: 


On  duty 

and 

performintr 

customary 

services. 


mies. 

Travelof  express  officials  and  employees 26,769,069 

Travel  of  joint  express  and  railroad  employees 10,0.')2,321 

Travel  of  mail  offlcinls  and  employees 56, 214, 352 


While 
occupyine 

seals  in 
passon^er 

coaches 

or  other 

passcnf;cr 

cars. 


Mills. 
28,764,061 
10,159,952 
60,949,747 


88 

POST  OFFICE  DEPARTMENT  EXHIBIT  NO.  58.— COPIES 
OF  EXPRESS  CONTRACTS  BETWEEN  VARIOUS  RAIL- 
ROADS  AND   THE   EXPRESS   COMPANIES. 

Tliis  exhibit  submits  copies  of  express  contracts  between 
the  American  II  ail  way  Express  Co.  and  the  United  States 
Railway  Administration;  the  standard  form  of  the  Ameri- 
can Express  Co.  prior  to  July  1,  1918;  the  Adams  Express 
Co.  and  the  Chesapeake  &  Ohio  Railroad  Co.  June  20,  1913 ; 
the  Southern  Express  Co.  and  the  Cincinnati,  New  Orleans 
&  Texas  Pacific  Railway  Co.  July  17,  1911;  and  the  Wells 
Fargo  Express  Co.  and  the  Chicago,  Milwaukee  &  St.  Paul 
Railway  Co.  January  23,  1909. 

POST  OFFICE  DEPARTMENT  EXHIBIT  NO.  59.— STATE- 
MENT SHOWING  FINES  IMPOSED  ON  RAILROADS 
DURING  THE  FISCAL  YEAR  ENDED  JUNE  30,  1917, 
ON  ACCOUNT  OF  LOSS  AND  DAMAGE  TO  MAILS 
RESULTING  FROM  WRECKS,  FIRES,  DEPREDA- 
TIONS,    ETC. 

This  exhibit  submits  a  statement  showmg  the  fines  im- 
posed on  raikoads  carrying  the  mails  durmg  the  fiscal  year 
ended  June  30,  1917,  on  account  of  loss  and  damage  to 
the  mails  resulting  from  wrecks,  fires,  depredations,  etc. 
The  total  amount  of  the  fines  imposed  in  that  year  for 
these  causes  was  S2,248. 

POST  OFFICE  DEPARTMENT  EXHIBIT  NO.  60.— STATE- 
MENT DESCRIBING  THE  SEVERAL  CLASSES  OF 
RAILROAD  MAIL  SERVICE  IN  POSTAL  AND  BAG- 
GAGE CARS;  THE  CHARACTER  AND  FURNISHINGS 
OF  THE  EQUIPMENT  USED;  SERVICE  PERFORMED 
BY  POSTAL  AND  RAILROAD  EMPLOYEES  IN  CON- 
NECTION THEREWITH,   ETC. 

This  exhibit  describes  in  detail  the  full  railway  post-office 
car  service,  storage  car  service,  apartment  railway  post- 
ofl[ice  car  service,  storage-space  service,  and  closed-pouch 
service,  stating  the  character  of  the  cars  used  and  of  the 
furnishings  therem,  and  the  services  performed  by  postal 
and  railway  employees  in  connection  therewith. 


89 

POST  OFFICE  DEPARTMENT  EXHIBIT  NO.  61.— STATE- 
MENT SHOWING  THE  RESULT  OF  TESTS  MADE 
BY  THE  RAILWAY  MAIL  SERVICE  TO  DETERMINE 
THE  NUMBER  OF  SACKS  OF  MAIL  THAT  COULD 
BE  PILED  IN  CERTAIN  AUTHORIZED  UNITS  OF 
CAR   SPACE,   ETC. 

This  exhibit  submits  a  statement  by  the  Division  of 
Railway  Mail  Service,  giving  results  of  tests  made  during 
the  period  January  26  to  February  1,  1919,  on  a  large 
number  of  representative  railway  post-ofRce  lines  to  de- 
termine the  number  of  sacks  of  mail  that  can  be  piled  in 
3  and  7  foot  units  of  car  space.  The  results  of  these  tests 
show  that  the  average  of  all  these  tests  for  a  3-foot  unit 
of  space  was  50.69  sacks;  in  a  7-foot  unit,  116.43  sacks.  The 
number  of  pieces  of  parcel  post  and  other  mail  outside  of 
sacks  piled  in  a  3-foot  unit  is  73.84  pieces,  and  in  a  7-foot 
unit,  168.26  pieces;  and  the  number  of  pieces  of  parcel  post 
and  other  mail  carried  outside  of  sack,  which  would  actually 
be  placed  in  a  sack,  1.18  pieces. 

POST  OFFICE  DEPARTMENT  EXHIBIT  NO.  62.— LIST  OF 
ALL  RAILROAD  MAIL  CARRIERS  WHOSE  REPORTS 
ARE  EMBRACED  IN  RECAPITULATION  OF  R.  M.  P. 
FORMS  NOS.  70  AND  71. 

This  exhibit  submits  a  list  of  the  railroad  companies 
whose  reports  of  operating  expenses,  other  expenses  out  of 
operatmg  revenues,  net  income,  and  other  financial  data 
are  embraced  in  the  recapitulation  of  R.  M.  P.  Forms 
Nos.  70  and  71,  submitted  to  the  commission  as  Exhibit 
No.  66. 

POST  OFFICE  DEPARTMENT  EXHIBIT  NO.  63.— LIST  OF 
RAILROAD  MAIL  CARRIERS  EMBRACED  IN  RECAPI- 
TULATION FOR  CLASS  I  CARRIERS  ON  R.  M.  P.  FORMS 
NOS.  70  AND  71.  THIS  LIST  INCLUDES  ALL  CLASS  I 
CARRIERS  WHICH  RENDERED  REPORTS  ON  R.  M.  P. 
FORMS  NOS.  1  TO  4,  INCLUSIVE,  AND  NOS.  50  TO  55, 
INCLUSIVE,  IN  SUCH  A  MANNER  AS  TO  PERMIT  THE 
USE  OF  THE  ENTIRE  STATISTICS.  A  FEW  CLASS  II 
AND  CLASS  III  CARRIERS  ARE  INCLUDED  IN  COM- 
BINATION WITH  PARENT  COMPANIES. 

This  exhibit  submits  a  list  of  Class  I  railroads  whose 
reports  of  financial  statistics  are  recapitulated  in  Post 
Office  Department  Exhibit  No.  67. 


90 

POST  OFFICE  DEPARTMENT  EXHIBIT  NO.  64.— EXPLANA- 
TION OF  METHOD  OF  APPORTIONMENT  OF  CAR-MILES 
IN  MIXED  CARS  (R.  M.  P.  FORM  NO.  3.  TO  THE  PAS- 
SENGER, EXPRESS,  AND  MAIL  SERVICES,  AND  OF 
ASCERTAINMENT  OF  TOTAL  CAR-MILES  IN  EACH 
CLASS  OF  SERVICE. 

This  exhibit  describes  in  detail  the  method  of  apportion- 
ment of  car-miles  in  mixed  cars  reported  by  the  railroad 
companies  on  R.  M.  P.  Form  No.  3  to  the  passenger,  ex- 
press, and  mail  services,  and  an  explanation  of  the  method 
of  ascertainment  of  the  total  car-miles  for  each  of  the 
classes  of  service  named  under  plans  Nos.  1  and  2  of  the 
Post  Office  Department. 

POST  OFFICE  DEPARTMENT  EXHIBIT  NO.  65.— EXPLANA- 
TION OF  THE  MANNER  OF  ASSIGNING  AND  APPOR- 
TIONING THE  UNAUTHORIZED  AND  UNUSED  SPACE 
TABULATED  ON  R.  M.  P.  FORM  NO.  301,  TO  THE  PAS- 
SENGER, EXPRESS,  AND  MAIL  SERVICES.' 

This  exhibit  describes  in  detail  the  method  followed  by 
the  Post  Office  Department  under  plans  Nos.  1  and 
2,  in  the  assignment  and  apportionment  of  the  excess, 
unauthorized  and  unused  space  reported  by  the  railroads 
as  operated  in  connection  with  the  mail  service,  and  of  all 
other  unused  space  in  mixed  cars  to  the  passenger,  express, 
and  mail  services;  and  the  method  of  ascertainment  of  the 
total  car-foot  miles  chargeable  to  each  of  those  services. 

POST  OFFICE  DEPARTMENT  EXHIBIT  NO.  66.— RECAPITU- 
LATION OF  R.  M.  P.  FORMS  NOS.  70  AND  71. 

This  exhibit  presents  consolidated  totals  of  the  infor- 
mation reported  by  262  carriers  of  Class  I  and  Class  II  of 
operating  levenues,  operating  expenses,  other  expenses  out 
of  operating  revenues,  net  income,  investment  in  property, 
divided  (1)  as  between  freight  and  passenger,  and  (2)  the  pas- 
senger statistics  being  subdivided  by  allocations  and  appor- 
tionments between  passenger,  express,  and  mail,  according 
to  plans  Nos.  1  and  2  of  the  Post  Office  Department;  and 
the  combination  therewith  of  the  car-miles  and  car-foot 
miles  of  each  class  of  service  in  order  to  produce  unit 
revenues,  costs,  and  income  in  each  class  of  service  for 


91 

the  month  of  April,  1917.  The  individual  statistics  for 
each  of  the  roads  represented  are  embraced  in  Exhibit  No. 
68,  and  the  results  of  this  exhibit  are  further  recapitulated 
and  compared  in  Exhibit  No.  75. 

The  total  results  shown  by  this  exhibit  are  as  follows, 
under  plan  No.  2  of  the  Post  Office  Department: 


Item. 

Passenger. 

Express. 

Mail. 

Totals. 

195,846,376 
12,618,886,723 
$59,617,696.61 
$42,743,706.93 
$3,063,653.24 
$13,810,336.44 

38,953,189 
2,264,443.277 
$8,173,399.16 
$6,648,859.23 
$462  086.68 
$1,062,453.25 

19,543,716 
1,168,247,390 
$4,379,420.43 
$3,529,671.90 

$252,481.72 
$597,266.81 

254,343,281 

16,051,577,390 

Operating  revenues 

Operating  expenses 

$72, 170, 516. 20 
$52,922,238.06 
$3,778,221.64 

Net  income    

$15,470,056.50 

The  per  cent  of  car-miles   and  car-foot-miles  in  each 
class  of  service  to  the  whole  is  as  follows: 

Passenger 78.  61 

Express 14. 11 

Mail 7-28' 

Total 100.  00 

The  unit  figures  in  each  class  are  shown  to  be  as  follows: 


Passenger. 

Express. 

Mail. 

Item. 

Car-mile. 

Car-foot- 
mile. 

Car-mile. 

Car-foot- 
mile. 

Car  -mile. 

Car-foot- 
mile. 

Operating  revenues 

Cents. 
30.44 

Mills. 
4.73 

Cents. 
20.98 

Mills. 
3.61 

Cents. 
22.41 

Mills. 
3.75 

Operating  expenses 

Other  expenses 

21.83 
1.56 

3.39 
.24 

17.07 
1.19 

2.94 
.20 

18.06 
1.29 

3.02 
.22 

Total  cx-penses 

23.39 

3.63 

18.26 

3.14 

19.35 

3.24 

7.05 

1.10 

2.72 

.47 

3.06 

.51 

POST  OFFICE  DEPARTMENT  EXHIBIT  NO.  67.— RECA- 
PITULATION OF  R.  M.  P.  FORMS  NOS.  70  AND  71,  FOR 
138  FIRST-CLASS  ROADS. 

This  exhibit  presents  the  same  class  of  statistics  con- 
tained in  Exhibit  No.  66,  for  carriers  of  Class  I  only,  com- 
prising 138  roads  of  that  class.     The  total  results  shown  by 


92 

this  exhibit  are  as  follows  under  phm  No.  2  of  the  Post 
OflicG  Department: 


Item. 

Passenger. 

Express. 

Mail. 

Totals. 

193,984,221 
12,519,077,057 

38,701,471 
2,251,177,014 
88,125,086.20 
§6,585,260.96 
$455,797.97 
$1,084,027.27 

19,370,709 

1,159,214,136 

84,329,776.34 

$3,484,115.04 

8248,020.27 

8597,641.03 

252,056,401 

15,929,468,237 

$59,085,0S3.88 
542,223,639.71 
$3,004,783.32 
$13,856,660.85 

$71,539,946.42 

Operating  expenses 

852,293,015.71 

other  expenses 

Net  income 

$3,708,601.56 
$15,538,329.15 

The  per  cent  of  car-miles  and  car-foot  miles  in  each  class 
of  service  to  the  whole  is  as  follows : 

Passenger 78.  59 

Express 14. 13 

Mail 7.28 

Total 100.  00 

The  miit  figures  in  each  class  of  service  are  shown  to  be 
'  as  follows : 


Passenger. 

Express. 

Mail. 

Item. 

Car-mile. 

Car-foot 
mile. 

Car-mile. 

Car-foot 
mile. 

Car-mile. 

Car-foot 
mile. 

Operating  revenues 

Cents. 
30.46 

mils. 
4.72 

Cents. 
20.99 

Mills. 
3.61 

2  93 
.20 

Cents. 
22.35 

17.99 
1.28 

Mills. 
3.74 

Operating  expenses 

21.77 
1.55 

3.37 
.24 

17.02 
1.17 

3.01 
.21 

Total  expenses 

23.32 

3.61 

18.19 

3.13 

19.27 

3.21 

7.14 

1.11 

2.80 

.48 

3.08 

.52 

POST  OFFICE  DEPARTMENT  EXHIBIT  NO.  68.— COPIES  OF 
STATEMENTS  ON  R.  M.  P.  FORM  NOS.  70  AND  71  FOR 
262  FIRST  AND  SECOND  CLASS  RAILROAD  COMPA- 
NIES. 

This  exhibit  presents  copies  of  the  individual  state- 
ments prepared  by  the  department  on  R.  M.  P.  Forms  Nos. 
70  and  71  for  262  first  and  second  class  railroad  companies, 
which  statements  are  consolidated  and  the  results  sub- 
mitted in  Exhibits  Nos.  66  and  67. 


93 

POST  OFFICE  DEPARTMENT  EXHIBIT  NO.  69.— TABLE 
SHOWING  THE  RESULTS  OF  THE  APPLICATION  TO 
THE  TON-MILES  OF  MAIL  SERVICE  PERFORMED  IN 
THE  SEVERAL  UNITS  OF  SPACE  (POST  OFFICE  DE- 
PARTMENT EXHIBIT  NO.  52),  OF  THE  TON-MILE  RATES 
OF  EXPRESS  PAY  TO  THE  RAILROADS  FOR  CARRYING 
EXPRESS  MATTER  (POST  OFFICE  DEPARTMENT  EX- 
HIBIT NO.  37);  COMBINATIONS  OF  VARIOUS  RESULTS 
ON  BASIS  OF  CARLOAD  AND  LESS-THAN-CARLOAD 
RATES  FOR  FIRST  AND  SECOND  CLASSES  AND  AVER- 
AGE FOR  ALL  CLASSES  OF  EXPRESS;  AND  THESE 
RESULTS  EQUATED  ON  THE  BASIS  OF  THE  DENSITY 
OF  THE  LOAD  (POST  OFFICE  DEPARTMENT  EXHIBIT 
NO.  49)  AND  THE  COST  PER  CAR-MILE,  MAIL  AND 
EXPRESS  (POST  OFFICE  DEPARTMENT  EXHIBIT  NO. 
66). 

This  exhibit  presents  the  estimated  compensation  that 
would  be.  received  for  the  transportation  of  the  mails  at 
the  rates  paid  to  the  railroads  by  the  express  companies 
for  carrying  express  matter  of  the  several  classifications  as 
shown  by  Post  Office  Department  Exhibit  No.  37. 

POST  OFFICE  DEPARTMENT  EXHIBIT  NO.  70.— GRAPHIC 
CHART    SHOWING    THE    DIFFERENCES      RESULTING 
FROM    THE    DEPARTMENT'S    METHODS    OF    ASCER- 
TAINING  THE    CAR-FOOT    MILES    OF   THE    SEVERAL 
CLASSES   OF    SERVICE    AND   OF  THE   DISTRIBUTION 
OF   OPERATING     REVENUES,   EXPENSES,    AND     NET 
INCOME  UNDER  PLANS  NOS.  1  AND  2. 
This  exhibit,  prepared  from  the  results  shown  in  the 
recapitulation  of  R.  M.  P.  Form  No.  71  in  Post  Office 
Department  Exliibit  No.  6G  shows  graphically  the  differ- 
ences resulting  from  the  treatment  of  the  statistical  data 
under  the  two  plans  of  the  Post  Office  Department,  Nos.  1 
and  2. 

POST  OFFICE  DEPARTMENT  EXHIBIT  NO.  71.— COPY  OF 
CIRCULAR  LETTER  FROM  THE  SECOND  ASSISTANT 
POSTMASTER  GENERAL,  DATED  NOVEMBER  2,  1916, 
AND  DISTRIBUTED  TO  THE  SEVERAL  CARRIERS  AT 
THAT  TIME,  REFERRING  TO  CERTAIN  STATEMENTS 
IN  CIRCULAR  LETTER  OF  THE  COMMITTEE  ON  RAIL- 
WAY MAIL  PAY  OF  THE  RAILROADS,  DATED  OCTOBER 
17,  1916,  AND  STATING  THE  DEPARTMENT'S  POSITION 
ON  THE  SUBJECTS  TREATED  IN  THE  CIRCULAR  LET- 
TER OF  THE  RAILWAY  MAIL  PAY  COMMITTEE  AND 
THE  REQUIREMENTS  OF  THE  LAW  RELATIVE  THERE- 
TO. 


9-4 

POST  OFFICE  DEPARTMENT  EXHIBIT  NO.  72.— COPY  OF 
CIRCULAR  LETTER  OF  THE  SECOND  ASSISTANT  POST- 
MASTER GENERAL,  REPRODUCING  CERTAIN  IN- 
STRUCTIONS ISSUED  BY  HIM  UNDER  DATES  OF  NO- 
VEMBER 2,  1914,  NOVEMBER  7,  1916,  AND  NOVEMBER 
22,  1916,  RELATIVE  TO  THE  SHIPMENT  OF  MERCHAN- 
DISE TO  BE  HAULED  ON  A  STAR  ROUTE. 

POST  OFFICE  DEPARTMENT  EXHIBIT  NO.  73.— STATE- 
MENT SHOWING  NUMBER  OF  CARLOAD  SHIPMENTS 
DURING  THE  FISCAL  YEAR  1918,  OF  STAMPED  EN- 
VELOPES AND  NEWSPAPER  WRAPPERS  FROM  DAY- 
TON, OHIO,  TO  THE  POINTS  NAMED. 

This  exhibit  shows  the  number  of  carload  shipments 
dm-ing  the  fiscal  year  1918  of  stamped  envelopes  and  news- 
paper wrappers  from  Dayton,  Ohio,  to  certain  points  in 
southern  classification  territory  referred  to  in  D.  M. 
Goodwin's  Carriers'  Exhibit  No.  24. 

POST  OFFICE  DEPARTMENT  EXHIBIT  NO.  74.— STATE- 
MENT COMPARING  THE  REVENUES  SHOWN  IN  RECA- 
PITULATION OF  R.  M.  P.  FORMS  NO.  71  (POST  OFFICE 
DEPARTMENT  EXHIBIT  NO.  66)  WITH  INVESTMENT  IN 
ROAD  AND  EQUIPMENT. 

(Part  1).  Statement  showing  for  Class  I  carriers  the 
passenger  service  train  revenue,  shown  on  Form  K.  M.  P. 
No.  70,  and  the  actual  express  and  mail  revenues,  shown 
on  Form  R.  M.  P.  No.  71,  and  recapitulated  in  Post  Office 
Department  Exhibit  No.  67;  and  comparing  the  same 
with  investment  in  road  and  equipment. 

(Part  2).  Statement  showing  a  comparison,  for  all 
roads  reporting,  of  income  account  with  investment  in 
property  on  the  same  basis  as  Part  1,  using  actual  rev- 
enues for  express  and  mail. 

POST  OFFICE  DEPARTMENT  EXHIBIT  NO.  75.— COMPARI- 
SON OF  PASSENGER,  EXPRESS,  AND  MAIL  SERVICE 
CAR-MILES,  REVENUES,  EXPENSES,  AND  TAXES, 
AND  OTHER  EXPENDITURES,  AND  NET  INCOME, 
WITH  RETURN  ON  INVESTMENT,  COMPILED  FROM 
POST  OFFICE  DEPARTMENT  EXHIBIT  NO.  66,  REPRE- 
SENTING THE  MONTH  OF  APRIL,  1917. 

The  results,  as  shown  by  this  exhibit  which  are  referred 
to  in  the  description  of  Post  Office  Department  Exhibit 
No.  66,  are  as  follows: 


95 


Passenger. 

Per 
cent 
to 
total 
pas- 
sen- 
ger. 

Express. 

Per 
cent 
to 
total 
pas- 
sen- 
ger. 

Mail. 

Per 
cent 

lo 
total 
pas- 
sen- 
ger. 

Car-miles     for     30-day 
period        

195,846,376 
$56,713,172.44 

77.00 

38,9.53,189 

15. 32 

19,543,716 
$4,379,420.43 

7.68 

Passenger-train  revenues 

81.  S8 
97  03 

S8, 173, 399. 16!  11.80 

-| 

23,019.771      .44 
6,625,839.461  13.89 

6.32 

Operatinc  expenses: 

5,073,339.69 

132,373.64 
3,397,298.26 

2.53 

Apportioned 

37,670,367.24|  78  99 

7.12 

Total 

42,743,706.93    80.77 

3.063.653.24:  81.09 
10,905,812.271  86.79 

6,648,859.23    12.56'     3,. 529, 671.  90 

6.67 

Taxes    and    other    ex- 
penses out  of  opeiat- 

462,086.68i  12.23 
1, 062, 453.  251     8. 46 

252, 481. 72 
597,266.81 

6.68 

4.75 

Invesimcnt  in  road  and 

equipmmt  property-- . 

Per  cent  of  net  income 

3,021,670,577.36 

0.361 
4.332 
Cents. 

28.96 

81.68 

433,409,362.37 

0.245 
2.940 
Cents. 

20.98 

11.72 

244,186,6.56.68 
0. 245 

6.60 

Per  cent  at  yearly  rate .  - 
Car-mile  rcycnues,  etc.: 
Passenger-tiain  rev- 
enues  

2. 940 

Cents.' 

22.41J 

Total  operating  ex- 

21.83 

1.56 
5.57 

17.07 

1.19 
2.72 

18.06 

Taxes  and  other  ex- 
penses  

3.06' 

POST  OFFICE  DEPARTMENT  EXHIBIT  NO.  76.— POST 
OFFICE  DEPARTMENT'S  PLAN  FOR  RAILWAY  MAIL 
PAY. 

This  exhibit  embraces  the  suggestions  of  the  Post  Office 
Department  for  the  consideration  of  the  commission  as  to 
changes  or  amendments  in  the  space  basis  system  of  pay 
which  it  considers  advisable.  These  suggestions  are  as 
follows : 

THE   POST   OFFICE   DEPARTMENT'S   PLAN   FOR  RAILWAY  MAIL 
PAY. 

The  space  basis  for  the  payment  of  compensation  for  the 
transportation  of  the  mails  by  railroads  as  provided  in  the 
act  of  July  28,   1916,  shall  be  continued,  subject  to  the 
following  modifications,  exceptions,  and  limitations: 
Regulnr  authorizations. 

1.  All  regular  authorizations  for  full  railway  post-office 
cars,  apartment  railway  post-office  cars,  and  full  storage 
mail  cars  may  be  changed  or  discontinued  at  divisional 
points  in  accordance  with  the  needs  of  the  service;  and 


96 

for  tliis  purpose  a  divisional  point  is  dciinod  as  one  where 
the  raih'oad  company  performs  switching  service  in  con- 
nection mth  passenger-train  service,  but  a  change  in  an 
apartment  car  authorization  may  be  made  only  at  such 
point  wdien  the  operating  conditions  of  the  train  in  question 
will  permit  it;  under  such  provisions  and  regulations  as  the 
Interstate  Commerce  Commission  may  prescribe. 
Emergency  autlwrizations . 

2.  All  units  of  space  needed  to  supplement  regular 
authorizations  of  space  shall  be  units  of  3,  7,  15,  or  30  feet, 
w^ithout  duplication  or  grouping,  and  such  units  shall  be 
discontinued,  increased,  or  decreased  at  any  point  w^here  a 
fluctuation  in  the  volume  of  mail  carried  requires  a  change 
from  one  unit  to  another. 

3.  Whenever  a  regularly  authorized  unit  of  storage  or 
closed  pouch  space,  combined  with  an  emergency  unit, 
necessitates  the  use  of  more  than  30  feet  of  linear  space  in 
a  baggage  or  storage  car  used  exclusively  for  the  mails,  a 
60-foot  car  will  be  requested  of  the  railroad  company  and 
paid  for  on  the  basis  of  the  round  trip,  provided  it  is  not 
used  by  the  carrier  in  the  opposite  direction. 

4.  Whenever  a  regular  authorization  is  exceeded  60  per 
cent  or  more  of  the  trips  during  a  period  of  30  consecutive 
days,  the  next  higher  unit  shall  be  authorized.     This  rule 
will  not  be  applied  in  the  month  of  December. 
Undersize  cars. 

5.  Where  a  railway  post-office  car  or  an  apartment  car 
is  deficient  in  length  but  otherwise  standard,  it  will  be 
paid  for  pro  rata.  In  computing  the  pay  for  such  cars 
the  major  portion  of  a  foot  will  be  regarded  as  a  full  foot. 
One-half  of  a  foot  or  less  wiU  be  disregarded. 
Deficiency  in  storage  space. 

6.  Wliere  a  railway  post-office  car  or  apartment  car  is 
of  standard  length  but  deficient  in  storage  space,  it  wiH  be 
paid  for  pro  rata  in  the  same  manner  as  cars  deficient  m 
length. 

Oversize  cars. 

7.  Whenever  an  oversize  car  is  furnished,  storage  units 
may  be  authorized  therein  on  the  basis  of  actual  measure- 
ment. 


97 

Side,  terminal,  ami  transfer  service. 

8.  Where  the  raihoad  companies  are  requu-ed  by  the 
Post  Office  Department  to  perform  side,  terminal,  or 
transfer  service  they  shall  be  compensated  separately  from 
the  line  rate  for  such  service  (other  than  that  performed  in 
or  directly  contiguous  to  railway  terminals  and  depots, 
unless  otherwise  provided  for),  in  the  amount  paid  therefor 
to  contractors  and  for  the  value  of  the  actual  time  of  their 
employees  while  engaged  in  the  carriage  of  the  mails, 
including  reasonable  cost  of  vehicular  service  that  may  be 
necessary. 

9.  Where  raihoad  companies  contract  for  such  service 
such  contracts  shall  be  let  to  the  lowest  responsible  bidder 
upon  advertisement. 

10.  Readjustment  for  such  service  shall  be  made  annu- 
ally and  the  companies  shall  furnish  to  the  Postmaster 
General  statements  in  detail  showing  the  cost  of  the  service 
rendered  on  such  forms  and  in  such  manner  as  the  Inter- 
state Commerce  Commission  may  prescribe. 

Merger  of  rates. 

11.  The  initial  and  terminal  allowances  shall  be  merged 
with  the  line  rate. 

POST  OFFICE  DEPARTMENT  EXHIBIT  NO.  77.— SAMPLE 
WEIGHT  CARD. 

This  exliibit  shows  a  sample  weight  card  as  used  by  the 
Post  Office  Department  during  the  regular  quadrennial 
weighings  of  the  mails. 

POST  OFFICE  DEPARTMENT  EXHIBIT  NO.  78.— SAMPLE 
WEIGHT  CIRCULAR. 

This  exhibit  is  a  copy  of  a  railroad  weight  circular  used 
by  the  Post  Office  Department  for  reporting  the  consoli- 
dations of  weights  carried  on  railroad  mail  routes  under 
the  weight-basis  system  of  payment. 

POST  OFFICE  DEPARTMENT  EXHIBIT  NO.  79.— LETTER 
OF  THE  POSTMASTER  GENERAL  TO  HON.  JAMES  T. 
LLOYD,  DATED  MARCH  28,  1914. 

Letter  of  tlic  Postmaster  General  to  Hon.  James  T. 
Lloyd,  dated  March  28,   1914,  with  reference  to  the  bill 


introcluccd  by  Mr.  Lloyd  providing  for  annual  weighings  of 
the  mails  and  his  suggestion  that  the  mail  be  weighed  by 
railroad  employees. 

In  this  letter  the  Postmaster  General  states  that  the 
proposal  that  the  mails  shall  be  weighed  b}^  railroad  em- 
plo3^ees  is  not  considered  advisable  by  department  officials. 

POST  OFFICE  DEPARTMENT  EXHIBIT  NO.  80.— LETTER 
OF  THE  POSTMASTER  GENERAL  TO  HON.  JAMES  T. 
LLOYD,  DATED  MAY  8,  1914,  IN  FURTHER  REFERENCE 
TO  THE  BILL  INTRODUCED  BY  MR.  LLOYD. 

This  exhibit  is  a  copy  of  a  letter  from  the  Postmaster 
General  to  the  Hon.  James  T.  Lloyd,  dated  May  8,  1914, 
in  further  reference  to  the  bill  introduced  by  Mr.  Lloyd, 
providing  for  annual  weighings  of  the  mails  on  railroad 
routes  and  his  suggestion  that  the  mails  be  weighed  by 
railroad  employees. 

In  this  letter  the  Postmaster  General  gives  further 
reasons  why  the  mails  should  not  be  weighed  by  the  rail- 
road employees. 

POST  OFFICE  DEPARTMENT  EXHIBIT  NO.  81.— STATE- 
MENT SHOWING  THE  ESTIMATED  AND  APPORTIONED 
EXPENSE  (INCLUDING  THE  DIRECTLY  ALLOCATED 
EXPENSE)  FOR  THE  MAILS,  AND  NET  INCOME  AT  THE 
SAME  RATE  PER  CAR-MILE  AS  THE  RAILROADS 
DERIVE  FROM  THE  CARRIAGE  OF  THE  EXPRESS 
BASED  UPON  LIKE  ESTIMATES  AND  APPORTION- 
MENTS. ON  THIS  BASIS  A  UNIFORM  RATE  IS  DE- 
DUCED WHICH  IS  APPLIED  TO  THE  AUTHORIZATIONS 
AS  OF  MARCH  27, 1917,  AND  THE  RESULTS  ARE  SHOWN 
IN  PART  II. 

Tliis  exhibit  is  herewith  fuUy  reproduced : 

PART    I. 
For  roads  in  Exhibit  66. 
Mail  operating  exponscs(col.  9,  Recap.  Form  71)  (Exhibit 

66) P,  529,  071.  90 

Other  expenses  out  of  revenue  (col.  12,  Recap.  Form  71) 

(Exhibit  6G) 252,  481.  72 

Total  estimated  expense  for  April,  1917 3,  782, 153.  62 

Total  estimated  expense  for  one  year 45,  385,  843.  44 


00 

l^et  income  for  mail  on  basis  of  express,  2.72  cents  per 
car-mile,  19,543,716  car-miles  multiplied  by  2.72  cents 
multiplied  by  12  (Exhibit  66)  equals $6,  379, 068.  84 

Mail  revenue  on  basis  of  estimated  express  net 

income 51,  764,  912.  28 

Less  estima^ted  cost  of  side  and  terminal  ser\'ice  for  these 

roads  (Record,  p.  737) 1,  349,  479.  42 

Total  for  roads  represented  in  Exhibit  66 50,  415,  432.  86 

Equated  60-foot  car-miles  per  annum,  1,168,247,390  car- 
foot  miles  multiplied  by  12  divided  by  60  equals  60- 
foot  car-mHes 233,649,478 

Bate  per  60-foot  car-mile cents . .  21.  57 

For  all  sen  ice. 

Total  for  roads  represented  in  Exhibit  66 $50,  415,  432.  86 

Total  for  remainder  of  roads  (252,195,357  car-miles  (Ex- 
hibit 51)  minus  233,649,478  car-miles)  equals  18,545,879 
car-miles,  at  21.57  cents,  equals 4,  COO,  346. 10 

Estimated  total  pay 54,  415,  778.  96 

PART    II. 


Units  of  service. 

Miles  of  service 
per  annum. 

service.              P^^" 

74,615,687.77 
11,529,805.64 

CcntR. 
21.5          816,042,372.87 

60-foot  full  railway  post-office  cars,   Land 

17.2              1,983,120.57 

Total 

80,145,493.41 

18,025,499.41 

30-foot  apartment  railway  post-office  cars. . . 
30-foot;<.apartment  railway  post-office  ears, 

131, 004, 522. 80 
14,148,468.72 

10.75           14,082,980.20 
8. 6              1, 216, 708. 30 

Total 

145,152,991.58 

15,299,754.50 

15-foot"apartrnent  railway  post-off.ce  cars. . . 
15-foot"  apartment  railway  post-office  cars, 
i_Land  Grant 

93, 153, 077. 73 
3,811.908.21 

5.375  1        5,007,010.17 
4.3      i            163,912.05 

Total 

90.905,585.94 

1        5,170,922.22 

45, 612, 290. 45 
4, 519, 807.  00 

21.5      1        9,800,642.44 

CO-footistorage  cars  Land  Grant  

17.2      1            777,417.22 

Total 

50,132,158.05 

10,584,059.66 

8,032,541.93 
2,121,203.00 

10.75    1            927,998.25 

8.6                  182,423.51 

Total 

10,753,745.59 

i        1,110,42L76 

13,821,028.95 
1,812,092.83 

5.375              742,912.55 

15-foot  storage  space  Land  Grant 

4.3                   77,919.99 

Total 

15,633,721.78 

820,832.54 

100 
PAKT  II — GontinuGcl. 


Units  of  service. 

Miles  of  service 
per  annum. 

Rate  per 
mile  of 
service. 

Annual  rate 
pay. 

12,855,511.47 
l,249,t85.94 

Cents. 
2.508 
2.006 

$322,416.22 

7-foot  storage  space,  Land  Grant 

25,0(«.69 

Total 

14,105,197.41 

347,484.91 

3-foot  storage  space                                  

9,251,948.44 
889, 196. 82 

1.075 
.86 

99, 458. 44 

7, 647. 09 

Total                                  

10,141,145.26 

J  07, 105. 53 

16,956,249.43 
1.879,292.04 

2.508 
2.006 

425, 262. 73 

37, 698. 59 

18,835,541.47 

3-foot  closed  pouch 

102.021,648.32 
7,264,087.18 

1.075 
.86 

1,096,732.71 

3-foot  closed  pouch  Land  Grant 

62, 476. 30. 

Total                                            

109,286,335.50 

1,159,209.01 

Grand  totil 

557,151.915.99 

53,088,250.89 

POST  OFFICE  DEPARTMENT  EXHIBIT  NO.  82.— ST ATEMENT 
SHOWING  FOR  MAIL  ROUTES  STATED  UPON  THE 
SPACE  BASIS,  THE  ESTIMATED  RAILROAD  MAIL  PAY 
PER  ANNUM  AS  OF  MARCH  27,  1917,  BASED  UPON  THE 
AUTHORIZED  MILES  OF  SERVICE  (POST  OFFICE  DE- 
PARTMENT EXHIBIT  NO.  5)  AND  THE  RATES  PROPOSED 
TO  BE  PAID  AS  STATED  IN  RAILROAD  COMPANIES' 
EXHIBIT  NO.  57,  EXCLUSIVE  OF  NEW  ENGLAND  DIF- 
FERENTIAL. 

This  exhibit  shows  for  each  class  of  service  authorized 
under  the  space  system  of  pay,  the  annual  miles  of  service 
authorized  equated  to  60-foot  car  miles,  average  rates  per 
mile  for  weight  and  space  (nonland-grant  and  land-grant) , 
and  the  estimated  pay  per  annum  for  distribution  space- 
and  weights  of  mail  based  on  the  average  haul,  including 
the  deductions  for  land-grant,  and  the  rates  per  ]>rorated 
60-foot  car  mile,  based  upon  the  rates  proposed  by  the 
railroads  to  be  paid  under  their  plan  (Railroad  Exhibit 
No.  57),  exclusive  of  New  England  differential. 

The  estimated  total  compensation  at  those  rates,  as> 
shown  by  this  exhibit,  equals  $86,926,537.97. 


101  ; '. 

POST  OFFICE  DEPARTMENT  EXHIBIT  NO.  83.— WESTERN 
PACIFIC  RAILROAD  CO.— GRAPHIC  CHART  SHOWING 
THE  CHARACTER  OF  THE  UNAUTHORIZED  SPACE 
CLAIMS  MADE  IN  CONNECTION  WITH  THE  OPERATION 
OF  APARTMENT  RAILWAY  POST-OFFICE  CARS. 

This  exhibit  presents  in  a  grapliic  manner  an  example 
of  the  character  of  space  reported  by  the  raih'oad  com- 
panies in  connection  with  the  operation  of  apartment 
raihva}-  post-office  cars  between  Salt  Lake  City,  Utah, 
and  San  Francisco,  Calif.,  classified  on  Exhibit  No.  48 
under  the  symbol  A. 

For  explanation  of  tlie  character  and  effect  of  this  claim, 
see  McBride's  testimony,  pp.  285,  286. 

POST  OFFICE  DEPARTMENT  EXHIBIT  NO.  84.— GREAT 
NORTHERN  RAILWAY  CO.— TWO  GRAPHIC  CHARTS 
SHOWING  CLAIMS  FOR  EXCESS,  UNAUTHORIZED  AND 
UNUSED  SPACE  CLAIMED  IN  CONNECTION  WITH  THE 
OPERATION  OF  AUTHORIZED  MAIL  SPACE. 

This  exhibit  presents  in  graphic  form  and  in  detail  the 
claims  made  by  the  Great  Northern  Railway  Co.  for  un- 
authorized, excess  and  unused  space  in  connection  with 
authorized  apartment  railway  post-office  cars,  storage 
space,  and  closed-pouch  space  on  route  No.  163510,  between 
Great  Falls  and  Billings,  Mont. 

For  explanation  of  the  character  and  effect  of  this  claim, 
see  McBride's  testimony,  pp.  307-310. 

POST  OFFICE  DEPARTMENT  EXHIBIT  NO.  85.— GREAT 
NORTHERN  RAILWAY  CO.— GRAPHIC  CHART  SHOWING 
CLAIMS  BY  THE  COMPANY  FOR  MOVEMENT  OF  UNAU- 
THORIZED AND  EXCESS  SPACE  IN  CONNECTION  WITH 
AUTHORIZED  OPERATION  OF  MAIL  SERVICE. 

This  exhibit  presents  in  detail  the  character  of  the  claims 
of  the  Great  Northern  Railwa}^  Co.  for  unauthorized  and 
excess  space  claimed  to  have  been  operated  in  connection 
with  authorized  units  of  apartment  railway  post-office  car 
service,  storage  space,  and  closed-pouch  space  on  route 
No.  1G1525  between  Devils  Lake  and  Boundary  Line, 
N.  Dak.  For  explanation  of  the  character  and  effect  of 
this  claim,  see  McBride's  testimony,  pp.  310,  311. 


102 

POST  OFFICE  DEPARTMENT  EXHIBIT  NO.  86.— PENN- 
SYLVANIA CO.— GRAPHIC  CHART  SHOWING  CLAIMS 
FOR  UNAUTHORIZED  MOVEMENT  OF  SPACE  IN  CON- 
NECTION WITH  THE  AUTHORIZED  OPERATION  OF 
CLOSED-POUCH  UNITS. 

This  exhibit  presents  in  detail  the  claims  made  by  the 
Pennsylvania  Co.  for  the  operation  of  unauthorized  space 
claimed  to  have  been  operated  in  connection  with  an 
authorization  of  closed-pouch  service  over  a  part  of  the 
run  on  route  131551,  between  Pittsburgh,  Pa.,  and  Chicago, 
111.  For  explanation  of  the  character  and  effect  of  this 
claim,  see  McBride's  testimony,  pp.  329,  330. 

POST  OFFICE  DEPARTMENT  EXHIBIT  NO.  87.— PENNSYL- 
VANIA CO.— GRAPHIC  CHART  SHOWING  THE  CLAIMS 
FOR  UNAUTHORIZED  SPACE  MADE  BY  THE  PENN- 
SYLVANIA CO.  IN  CONNECTION  WITH  THE  OPERATION 
OF  CLOSED-POUCH  UNITS. 

This  exhibit  presents  in  detail  the  manner  of  reporting 
the  unauthorized  space  claimed  to  have  been  necessarily 
operated  in  connection  with  authorizations  for  closed- 
pouch  space  on  route  131551,  between  Pittsburgh,  Pa.,  and 
C-hicago,  111.  For  explanation  of  the  character  and  effect 
of  this  claim,  see  McBride's  testimony,  p.  331. 

POST  OFFICE  DEPARTMENT  EXHIBIT  NO.  88.— NORTHERN 
PACIFIC  RAILWAY  CO.— GRAPHIC  CHART  SHOWING 
CLAIMS  MADE  BY  NORTHERN  PACIFIC  RAILWAY 
CO.  FOR  OPERATION  OF  UNAUTHORIZED  AND  UNUSED 
SPACE  IN  CONNECTION  WITH  AUTHORIZED  MAIL 
OPERATION. 

This  exhibit  presents  in  detail  the  car-foot  mile  claims 
made  by  the  Northern  Pacific  Railway  Co.  as  having  been 
necessarily  operated  in  connection  with  the  operation  of 
authorized  mail  units  of  apartment  car  and  closed-pouch 
services,  with  particular  reference  to  the  feasibility  of 
reducing  consist  of  train.  For  explanation  of  this  claim,  see 
McBride's  testimony,  typewritten  record,  p.  3897. 

POST  OFFICE  DEPARTMENT  EXHIBIT  NO.  89.— MEMORAN- 
DUM RELATIVE  TO  CONVERTIBLE  CARS. 

This  exhibit  is  a  memorandum  prepared  by  the  depart- 
ment outlining  the  policy  of  the  department  with  reference 
to  the  remodeling  or  reconstruction  of  postal  cars  under 
the  plans  for  convertible  cars.  (See  Post  Office  Depart- 
ment Exhibit  No.  2.) 


ABSTRACT   OF  EVIDENCE— ORAL 
TESTIMONY. 


ADMINISTRATION, 

GENERAL. 

SPACE-BASIS  ADMINISTRATION  SATISFACTORY  FROM 
AN  OPERATING  STANDPOINT. 

Mr.  Kxox,  superintendent,  Railway  Mail  Service, 
Seattle,  Wash.,  on  cross-examination  testified  as  follows: 

Answer.  From  an  operating  standpoint  I  am  thoroughly 
satisfied  with  the  present  method  of  administration. 
(R.  3099.) 

SPACE  BASIS  ADMINISTERED  FAIRLY  AND  IN  KEEPING 
WITH  THE  SPIRIT  OF  THE  PLAN  AND  UNIFORMLY 
OVER  THE  COUNTRY. 

Mr.  Kxox  testified  on  cross-examination  as  follows: 

Question  (by  Mr.  Wood.  You  are  familiar  with  the 
manner  in  which  the  space  basis  has  been  administered  by 
the  Post  Office  Department? 

Answer.  I  think  so:  ves,  sir. 

Question.  And  you  think  it  has  been  administered  faniy 
and  in  keeping  with  the  spirit  of  a  space-basis  plan,  do 
vou  not  'i  ,        Y^ 

Answer.  Yes;  I  think  so,  taking  into  consideration  the 
fact  that  it  is  a  new  service. 

***** 

Question.  Whether  it  is  a  new  service  or  an  old  service, 
you  think  the  manner  in  which  it  has  been  administered 
IS  in  keeping  with  proper  practice  under  the  sjiace-basis 
plan,  and  with  the  theory  on  which  the  space  basis  is 
established  ? 

Answer.  Yes,  sir:  I  think  so. 

Question.  You  think  so:  and  it  has  been  administered 
pretty  uniformly  all  over  the  country,  has  it  not  < 

Answer.  Yes;  I   would   say    it   has   been    administered 
uniformly  all  over  the  country.     (R.  3066,  3067.) 
(103) 


104 

RELATIONS  BETWEEN  THE  RAILROAD  COMPANIES  AND 
OFFICERS  OF  THE  POSTAL  SERVICE  GENERALLY 
COOPERATIVE. 

Mr.  Gaines,  superintendent,  Railway  Mail  Service, 
Fort  Worth,  Tex.,  testified  on  direct  examination  as  follows : 

Question  (by  Mr.  Stewart)  .  Now,  Mr.  Searle  made  the 
statement  in  "connection  with  some  questions  that  were 
uncier  discussion,  and  I  do  not  now  remember  how  ex- 
tensive they  were,  that  there  was  absolutely  no  coopera- 
tion from  the  officers  of  the  department  in  those  regards. 
Will  you  please  state,  in  general,  wdiat  are  the  relations 
between  the  railroad  companies  and  the  officers  of  the 
service,  so  far  as  you  know  them? 

Answer.  If  Mr.  '  Searle  had  in  mind  the  question  of 
whether  or  not  the  railroad  coriipany  would  consent  to 
reductions  in  baggage-car  units  or  anything  of  that  kind, 
where  we  found  space  was  being  paid  for  that  was  not 
necessary,  of  course  it  is  true.  But  we  do  not  consult 
the  railroad  companies  on  those  kinds  of  points.  Ques- 
tions of  necessity  for  placing  cars  in  service  of  a  larger 
size,  either  mail  apartment,  or  railway  post-office  cars, 
are  taken  up  with  the  railroad  companies,  unless  the 
larger  size  car  is  actually  in  use  in  the  service  on  the  line 
to  the  capacity  which  "it  is  intended  to  recommend  the 
authoijization.  "^  Mr.  Searle  himself  cited  an  example  of 
consultation  as  to  the  movement  of  the  railway  post-office 
car  between  Fort  Worth  and  Dallas,  which  the  company 
desired  to  leave  in  the  train,  and  which  we  would  have 
preferred  to  have  cut  out  at  Fort  Worth  for  advance 
distribution;  but,  as  is  our  practice,  I  believe,  without 
exception,  we  are  glad  to  give  and  take  on  these  proposi- 
tions, and  we  could  manage  our  service  so  as  to  handle  it 
all  right  with  the  cars  operated  as  the  railroad  company 
desires. 

I  do  not  want  to  burden  the  record  with  the  numerous 
cases  that  might  be  mentioned,  but  in  all  these  cases  of 
car  runs,  through  car  runs,  the  wishes  of  the  raiboad 
companies  are  considered.     (R.  3282,  3283.) 

GENERAL  ADMINISTRATIVE  POLICY  DETERMINED  IN 
THE  POST  OFFICE  DEPARTMENT. 

Mr.  Knox  testified  on  cross-examination  as  follows: 
Question  (by  Mr.  Wood).  And  the  manner   of   its  ad- 
ministration has  been  a  matter  that  has  been  dictated  and 
determined  here  in  Washington  in  the  Post  Office  Depart- 
ment, has  it  not? 


105 

Answer.  With  the  assistance  of  the  15  division  super- 
intendents in  conference  from  time  to  time,  who  have 
been  consulted  in  relation  to  these  matters. 

Question.  Yes;  but  I  mean  that,  so  far  as  any  general 

Eolicy  is  concerned,  any  general  administrative  polic}^,  that 
as  been  determined  here  ? 

Answer.  That  has  been  determined  in  Washington;  yes, 
sir.     (R.  3067.) 

ADMINISTRATIVE  CHANGES  BY  DIFFERENT  OFFICIALS 
WIIiLNOT  BE  SO  MARKED  AS  TO  INJURE  RAILROADS. 

Mr.  Kxox  on  cross-examination  testified  as  follows: 
Answer.  *     *     *     j   don't   think  the   changes  by  suc- 
ceeding administrations  will  be  so  marked  that  there  will  be 
any  particular  injury  to  any  railroad  companv  or  com- 
panies.    (R.  3102.) 

SOME  MODIFICATIONS  IN  ADMINISTRATION  OF  SPACE 
BASIS  WOULD  REMOVE  OBJECTIONS. 

Mr.  Gaixes  testified  on  cross-examination  as  follows: 

Question  (by  Mr.  Wood).  You  think  that  the  space 
basis,  I  take  it,  has  been  administered  in  the  most  prac- 
tical way  in  which  it  can  be  ? 

Answer.  Well,  I  think  there  might  be  some  modifica- 
tions of  it  that  would  remove  a  great  many  of  the  objections 
that  vou  have  raised,  where  thev  seem  to  have  merit. 
(R.  3322,  3323.) 

SOME  CHANGES  IN  ADMINISTRATION  COULD  BE  MADE 
WITH  BENEFIT  TO  THE  POST  OFFICE  DEPARTMENT 
AND  THE  RAILROADS. 

Mr.  Kxox  testified  on  cross-examination  as  follows: 

Question  (by  Mr,  Wood).  Well,  if  the  space  basis  is  to 
continue  in  operation,  do  you  see  any  way  in  which  it  can 
be  administered  any  differently  from  what  it  has  been  ? 

Answer.  Oh,  yes;  I  see  a  great  many  ways. 

***** 

Question.  Well,  can  you  see  any  way  in  which,  in  fair- 
ness and  in  justice  to  the  Post  Office  Department,  it  ought 
to  be  administered  any  differently  from  the  manner  in 
which  it  has  been  administered  ? 

Answer.  Some  changes  could  ])e  made  with  benefit  to  the 
Post  Office  Department  and  to  the  raih-oads;  ves,  sir;  I 
think  so.      (R.  3067,  3068.) 


106 

COMPANIES  MIGHT  BE  RELIEVED  UNDER  CEkTAIN 
CONDITIONS  OF  DIFFICULT  SITUATIONS  ARISING 
FROM  AUTHORIZATIONS  CHANGING  EN  ROUTE. 

"Ml.  Knox  testified  on  cross-examination  as  follows: 

*  *  *  That  might  relieve  the  coinpanies  of  some  con- 
ditions complained  of  in  re,2:ard  to  the  operation  of  the  cars. 

Question  (by  Mr.  Wood).  Well,  what  and  how? 

Answer.  Curtailing  them,  changing  authorizations  from 
a  higher  to  a  lesser  unit  at  points  where  the  railroad  com- 
pany is  in  a  very  difficult  situation.  That  might  be  done, 
in  my  opinion.  "  That  is  a  personal  opinion  of  mine,  how- 
ever.    It  does  not  go  any  further. 

Question.  You  think,  in  fairness,  it  ought  to  be  done,  do 
you  not  I 

Answer.  Under  certain  conditions. 

Question.  And  what  are  those  conditions? 

Answer.  W^here  the  railroad  company  is  physically 
unable  to  make  the  change  in  the  consist  of  the  train. 

^:  *  *  *  * 

Question.  How  would  you  determine  whether  it  was 
impossible?  You  say  absolutely  impossible  lor  the  rail- 
road to  make  the  shift.  Now,  we  might  have  quite  a  debate 
about  that. 

Answer.  Well,  if  that  condition  were  placed  in  the  law, 
the  investigation  ought  to  be  made  by  the  division  super- 
intendent "and  representative  of  the  railroad  as  to  the 
actual  conditions  at  the  point. 

Question.  And  then,  after  the  investigation  has  been 
made,  who  ought  to  decide  it? 

Answer.  The  Post  Office  Department,  of  course.  *  *  * 
(R.  3070-3072.) 

METHOD  OF  HANDLING  EMERGENCY   SPACE   AUTHORI- 
ZATIONS COULD  BE   SIMPLIFIED. 

Mr.  Kkox  testified  on  cross-examination  as  follows : 
Question  (by  Mr.  W^ood).  *     *     *     You  say  you  think 
that  some  changes  could  be  made  which  would  be  bene- 
ficial to  the  Post  Office  Department.     What  do  you  thnik 
those  changes  are  ?  n-  r 

Answer.  Simplifying  the  method  of  the  handlmg  of 
emergency  space,  for  instance.     (R.  3068.) 


iUT 

COMPARATIVE    ADMINISTRATIVE    COST   OF   WEIGHT   AND 
SPACE   SYSTEMS. 

COMPARATIVE      COST      OF      ADMINISTRATION      UNDER 
WEIGHT  AND  SPACE  BASES. 

Mr.  Stoxe,  assistant  general  superintendent  of  Railway 
Mail  Service,  testified  on  direct  examination,  in  reply  to 
Attorney  Examiner  Brown's  question,  as  follows : 

Answer.  If  you  limit  it  to  the  headquarters  of  the  Railway 
Mail  Service,  there  is  very  little  difference  in  the  work,  but 
that  is  a  limited  part  of  the  whole.  The  greater  part  of  the 
work,  whether  by  weight  or  space,  would  be  in  the  field, 
and  after  they  reach  the  department  it  would  not  be  in  my 
immediate  office  or  division,  but  comes  under  what  is  known 
as  the  Division  of  Railway  Adjustment,  where  all  the  com- 
putations are  made,  whet*her  as  to  weight  or  space. 

Question.  Does  it  require  an}-  more  clerical  help,  month 
by  month  or  year  by  year,  to  have  the  space  basis  than  the 
weight  basis  ? 

Answer.  I  would  not  undertake  to  speak  for  the  Division 
of  Railway  Adjustment,  because  there  is  a  superintendent 
in  charge  who  would  have  better  information  on  that  than 
I  have.  The  work  that  is  done,  as  I  said,  in  the  office  of 
the  general  superintendent,  with  which  I  am  connected,  is 
a  very  small  part  of  the  whole,  and  I  would  say  that  there 
would  be  very  little  difference.     (R.  359.) 

'Mt.  Stone  on  direct  examination  also  testified  as  follows: 

Question  (by  Attorney  Examiner  Browx).  I  would  like 
to  ask  you  one  other  question.  In  comparing  the  amount 
of  work  occasioned  by  the  space  basis  and  weight  basis, 
you  had  in  mind  a  quadrennial  weighing  as  against  a  con- 
tinuous measurement  of  the  space  ? 

Answer.  A  quadrennial  weighing,  as  was  the  practice 
under  the  weight  system. 

Question.  As  compared  to  a  continuous  measurement  of 
the  space  every  day  ? 

Answer.  From  time  to  time,  as  it  is  needed. 

Question.  Theoretically  it  would  be  possible  to  have  a 
continuous  weighing,  to  weigh  every  shipment  'i 

Answer.  It  might  be  theoretical.  I  think  it  would  be 
impracticable. 

Question  (by  Dr.  Lorenz).  On  the  other  hand,  it  would 
be  possible  to  have  an  occasional  measurement  of  space- 
once  a  year,  say  ? 

Answer.  That  would  be  possible. 


108 

Question.  In  comparing  the  cost  of  the  two,  do  you  not 
think  that  the  same  basis  of  comparison  should  be  used, 
either  quadrennial,  annual,  semi-annual,  or  monthly  in  both 
cases  ? 

Answer.  That  might  be,  but  I  was  comparing  the  actual 
conditions  as  operated  under  the  weight  and  the  space  sys- 
tems, respectively.     (R.  361,  362.) 

Mr.  Stoxe  on  cross-examination  also  testified  as  follows: 

Question  (by  Attorney  Examiner  Brown).  Does  not 
that  require  a  larger  clerical  force  to  take  care  of  the  space 
basis  than  it  did  for  the  weight  basis  ? 

Answer.  Under  the  weight  system,  when  one  of  those 
weighings  was  in  process — and  there  was  a  weighing  in 
process  in  some  section  of  the  country  every  year  for  105 
days — during  that  time  we  would  have  to  have  a  small 
army  of  weighers  to  go  out  on  every  car  and  weigh  the 
mail  on  and  off  at  every  station,  and  we  would  have  addi- 
tional men  in  big  stations  to  weigh  the  mail  on  actual 
scales,  trucks  after  trucks.  That  involved  an  immense 
amount  of  work,  and  that  continued  for  over  three  months. 
It  was  105  days.  While  that  occurred  in  one  section  of  the 
country  only  once  in  four  years,  it  would  be  occurring  some- 
where for  three  months  every  year,  and  that  required  a 
great  deal  of  work.  Now,  this  other  work,  these  readjust- 
ments of  space  from  time  to  time,  are,  to  quite  an  extent, 
taken  care  of  by  our  regular  employees,  which  we  would 
have  at  the  railway  stations — transfer  clerks,  whose  busi- 
ness it  would  be  to  supervise  the  loading  and  discharging 
of  these  mails.  They  could  tell,  as  a  part  of  their  duties, 
without  employing  some  one  additionally  for  that  specific 
work.  And  so  it  would  be  on  the  trains.  We  have  our 
clerks  distributing  mail  anyway,  and  they  keep  themselves 
informed,  the  clerk  in  charge,  as  to  the  needs. 

Question.  So  it  is  your  judgment  that  as  between  the 
weight  basis  and  the  space  basis  there  would  be  no  greater 
expense  under  the  space  basis  than  under  the  weight  basis  ? 

Answer.  That  is  my  judgment,  so  far  as  the  Railway  Mail 
Service  is  concerned.     (,R.  380,381.) 

Mr.  Stone  on  cross-examination  also  testified  as  follows : 

Question  (by  Mr.  Wood).  You  say  that  method  of  opera- 
tion involves  no  more  work  and  administrative  detail  than 
the  old  system  under  the  weight  basis,  under  which,  if 
there  was  an  increased  volume  of  mail,  it  was  given  to 
the  railroad  company  by  the  men  in  the  field,  and  they 
-were  compelled  to  handle  it  ? 


109 

Answer.  I  am  of  that  opinion,  but,  you  understand,  I 
am  not  talking  of  one  specific  case.  I  am  taking  the  service 
year  in  and  year  out,  because  my  opinion  is  made  in  view 
of  the  fact  that  these  quadrennial  weighings  involved  such 
an  immense  amount  of  work,  not  only  on  the  trains,  but 
there  has  to  be  a  temporary  force  organized  in  each  of  the 
division  superintendent's  offices  at  headcparters,  and  they 
have  to  receive  these  weight  cards  made  out,  train  by  train, 
day  by  day,  and  make  the  tabulations  and  computations, 
so  as  to  find  out  the  average,  by  consolidating  all  of  these 
trains  on  all  of  these  dates  and  reducing  them  to  an  average. 
Then  those  weight  cards  would  come  to  the  department, 
where  there  are  further  computations  to  be  made.  I  am 
speaking  of  the  force  at  division  headquarters.  Formerly 
it  was  very  much  larger  than  it  has  been  in  recent  years, 
because  in  some  way  the  work  has  been  transferred  to  the 
department  here:  but,  in  any  event,  there  was  a  large 
clerical  force  employed  there  at  headquarters  or  at  the  de- 
partment, or  both,  to  handle  the  work  connected  with  the 
weight  system.     (R.  389,  390.) 

Mr.  Stone  on  cross-examination  also  testified  as  follows: 

Question.  You  think  all  this  talk  about  the  weights  is 
responsive  to  that  question  ? 

Answer.  Yes;  the  increase  in  the  amount  of  mail  does 
not  apply  to  one  particular  train.  It  applies  to  the  service 
as  a  whole  for  a  period  of  time — four  years.     (R,  390.) 

Mr.  Stoxe  on  re-crossexamination  also  testified  as  fol- 
lows: 

Question  (by  Mr,  Wood).  Mr.  Stone,  I  wanted  to  ask 
you  if  you  knew  to  what  extent  the  transfer  clerks  and 
clerical  forces  in  the  transfer  clerks'  offices  have  been  in- 
creased under  the  space  basis  in  order  to  take  care  of  the 
charges  in  the  authorizations  and  to  give  the  necessary 
supervision  ? 

Answer.  I  think  very  little.  There  have  been  additional 
clerks  allowed  at  various  stations,  but  not  solely  on  account 
of  the  space  system,  but  because  additional  supervision  of 
the  dispatch  of  the  mail  has  been  needed.     (R.  396.) 

Mr,  CoRRiDOX,  Superintendent  Division  of  Railway 
Adjustments,  Post  Office  Department,  testified  on  direct 
examination  as  follows : 

Question  (by  Attorney  Examiner  Brown).  Well,  what 
has  been  your  experience  in  reference  to  the  increase  in  the 
clerical  forces  necessary  to  take  care  of  the  space  basis  as 
compared  with  the  weight  basis  ? 


110 

Answer.  There  is  no  increase  in  force  necessary,  \yhen 
you  consider  the  force  necessary  for  the  annual  weighings. 

Question.  Well,  you  have  had  some  increase,  then? 

Answer.  Yes. 

Question.  But  your  opinion  is  that  that  increase  does 
not  entail  an  expense  upon  the  department  over  and  above 
what  the  annual  weighings  did  ? 

Answer.  No;  that  was  demonstrated  tlirough  the  statis- 
tical weighing  period  in  the  spring  of  1917,  when  we  had 
at  that  time  a  large  force  to  compile  these  statistics — per- 
haps over  118  or  120  clerks.  We  have  now^  approxirnately 
75  clerks  adjusting  the  affidavits  on  the  space  basis  and 
authorizing  the  service,  about  20  authorizing  the  service, 
and  I  should  say  between  perhaps  55  or  60  adjusting 
monthly  affidavits,  or  the  quarterly  affidavits. 

***** 

Question.  To  the  layman  the  proposition  would  appear 
to  be  that  when  you  make  your  weighings  once  in  every 
four  years,  section  by  section  in  the  country,  the  railway 
mail  pay  is  fixed  for  that  section,  while  your  space  basis  is 
fluid  and  constantly  changing  in  accordance  with  the  in- 
crease in  space  and  the  decrease  in  space  needed,  and  that 
it  w^ould  require  a  larger  clerical  force  to  take  care  of  the 
space  basis  than  it  would  the  weight  basis.  Now,  you 
say — and  I  want  to  get  you  right — that  in  your  experience 
and  in  your  judgment  the  operation  of  the  space  basis, 
so  far  as  the  expense  to  the  public,  through  the  Post  Office 
Department,  is  concerned,  there  would  be  no  substantial 
difference? 

Answer.  By  limiting  that  to  the  operation  of  the  Division 
of  Railway  Adjustments? 

Question.  Yes. 

Answer.  Yes,  sir.     (R.  401-403.) 

and  also  on  re-direct  examination  as  follows : 

Question  (by  Mr.  Stewart).  Mr.  Corridon,  I  w^ant  to 
call  your  attention  to  Post  Office  Exhibit  No.  19,  statement 
regarding  the  cost  of  the  quadrennial  weighings,  etc.  You 
will  find  stated  thereon  the  total  cost  for  the  four  years. 
I  will  ask  you  to  state  what  it  would  be  for  one  year. 

Answer.  S272, 154.89. 

Question.  Now,  assuming  that  you  have  75  men  engaged 
upon  the  space  work,  and  you  were  paying  them  on  the 
average  of  $1,500  per  year,  what  would  that  amount  to  ? 

Answer.  You  say  I  have  75  clerks.  That  would  amount 
to  $112,500.     (As  corrected  by  witness.     R.  427.) 

Question.  Are  those  two  items  of  expenditure  approxi- 
mately comparable,  so  far  as  the  expense  is  concerned,  in 


Ill 

your  division,  tiie  expense  growing  out  of  the  space-basis 
work  and  the  weight-basis  work  ? 

Answer.  I  would  say  that  the  work  growing  out  of  the 
space  basis  in  the  Division  of  Railwa}"  Adjustments  is  less 
expensive  than  the  work  growing  out  of  the  railway  adjust- 
ment, plus  the  costof  the  weighing  annually.     (II.  426,  427.) 

AUTHORIZATION  OF  SERVICE  AND  ADAPTATION 
OF  OPERATION  THERETO. 

GENERAL. 

SPACE    AUTHORIZATIONS    MUST    BE    CONTROLLED    BY 
POST  OFFICE  DEPARTMENT. 

Mr.  Gaixes  testified  on  cross-examination  as  follows: 

Question  (by  Mr.  Wood)  .  Now,  my  question  is  this :  The 
authorizations  under  the  space  basis  must  necessarily  be 
under  the  control  of  the  Post  Office  Department,  must  thev 
not? 

Answer.  Well,  that  or  any  other  plan  would  have  to 
have  administration.  Administration  has  to  be  vested 
somewhere. 

Question.  Yes;  administration  would  always  be  vested 
in  the  Post  Office  Department,  so  far  as  the  carriage  of  the 
mails  is  concerned,  as  I  see  it,  and  must  be  there:  but  ad- 
ministration for  the  purpose  of  pay,  when  the  pay  is  on  the 
space  basis,  and  the  administration  of  the  space  and  the 
authorizations  of  the  space  must  necessarily  be  left  with 
the  Post  Office  Department  and  be  in  its  hands,  must  it  not  ? 

Answer.  Yes;  but  just  so  long  as  we  ask  for  what  we 
need  and  pay  for  what  we  get,  and  the  commission  fixes 
the  rate  for  the  service  it  performs,  I  do  not  see  where  that 
has  anything  to  do  with  the  proposition.     *     *     * 

Question.  The  fact  is  that  you  and  I  do  not  disagree  on 
this  proposition  at  all,  that  if  you  are  going  to  have  the 
space  system  of  pay  the  space  authorizations  must  be 
within  the  control  of  the  department. 

Answer.  Well,  I  can  see  where  such  rules  might  be  laid 
down  by  the  Interstate  Commerce  Commission  which 
would  probably  remove  some  of  the  objections  that  you 
have. 

Question.  Well,  that  may  be,  but  whatever  the  rules  are, 
the  space  authorizations  must  be  under  the  control  of  the 
Post  Office  Department. 

Answer.  Yes.  *  *  *  The  rules  must  be  under  the 
control  of  the  Post  Office  Department,  like  the  weight- 
basis  rules  or  anything  else.     (R.  3294,  3295.) 


112 
REGULAR  AUTHORIZATIONS. 

Mr.  Stone  testified  on  cross-examination  as  follows: 

Question  (by  Mr.  Wood).  Now,  take  the  regular  author- 
izations.    Who  authorizes  the  amount  of  regular  space  ? 

Answer.  They  are  authorized  here  in  the  Division  of 
Railway  Adjustments,  upon  reports  received  from  the  field 
men  of  the  Railway  Mail  Service,  the  superintendent  and 
chief  clerk,  as  to  how  much  space  they  regularly  need  on  a 
certain  train. 

Question.  Well,  they  do  not  go  through  your  department  ? 

Answer.  They  pass  through  our  department,  yes;  but 
they  are  not  finally  acted  on  there. 

Question.  Just  what  is  the  basis?  Let  us  trace  one  of 
these  things  from  its  inception  to  its  conclusion,  please. 

Answer.  Well,  if  a  new  train  were  put  on — to  begin  at 
the  beginning — the  division  superintendent  would  get  his 
information,  possibly,  by  personal  inspection;  perhaps  by 
inspection  of  his  chief  clerk,  as  to  how  much  mail  would 
ordinaiily  be  required  on  that  tiain,  and  then  he  would 
reach  a  conclusion  as  to  whether  he  thought  it  should  be 
closed-pouch  service  or  apartment  or  distribution  service. 
In  either  event,  he  would  make  a  formal  report  to  the  de- 
partment, stating  what  he  wanted,  and  giving  his  reasons 
w^hy  he  thought  the  mail  should  be  established  on  such  a 
train.  That  would  be  passed  through  the  Division  of 
Railway  Mail  to  the  Division  of  Railway  Adjustment,  and 
if  approved  an  order  would  be  prepared  there,  signed  by 
the  Second  Assistant  Postmaster  General,  and  sent  to  the 
railway  company.  Then  the  superintendent  of  the  rail- 
road company  would  be  notified  that  certain  space  would 
be  needed  on  a  certain  train. 

Question.  *  *  *  Now,  under  the  space  basis,  if  you 
require  additional  space  as  a  regular  authorization,  in 
order  to  adjust  the  space  to  the  change  in  the  volume  of 
the  mail  offered  for  carriage  in  that  particular  locality, 
what  is  the  method  by  which  these  space  authorizations 
are  made  responsive  to  the  increase  in  the  volume  from  an 
administrative  standpoint  of  the  department  'I 

Answer.  If  there  is  a  given  authorization  on  a  train,  and 
the  superintendent  notices,  or  the  chief  clerk  notices,  that 
the  emergency  space  is  frequently  being  used  on  those 
trains  to  such  an  extent  as  to  warrant  an  increase  in  the 
regular  authorization,  he  will  then  make  a  report  to  the 
department  to  that  effect,  and  an  order  will  be  issued  in- 
creasing the  regular  authorization. 


113 

Question.  Just  as  a  matter  of  course,  the  order  would  be 
issued  ? 

Answer.  If  supported  by  evidence  as  to  its  need,  yes. 

Question.  That  is  what  I  am  getting  at.  Let  us  trace 
that  through  to  its  conclusion.  To  reach  the  conclusion 
that  there  ought  to  be  an  increase  in  the  regular  authoriza- 
tions, who  is  the  first  man  whose  attention  is  directed  to 
that  ?  Is  it  the  superintendent  of  the  division,  or  is  it  the 
transfer  clerk,  or  is  it  some  field  agent  somewhere  of  some 
sort  I 

Answer.  It  would  more  often  grow  out  of  the.frecjuency 
of  the  use  of  the  emergency  space.  Either  a  clerk  on  a 
train  or  a  transfer  clerk  might  be  calling  for  additional 
emergency  space  frequently.  Those  reports  go  to  the 
chief  clerk  and  to  the  division  superintendent.  He  sees 
those  increases,  and  he  is  satisfied  that  they  are  so  frequent 
and  likely  to  continue  to  be  so  frequent  that  it  should  be 
made  a  regular  authorization.  It  is  sufhcient  for  him  just 
to  make  his  report  to  the  department  that  an  emergency 
space  of  so  many  feet  had  been  used  with  such  and  such 
frec(uency.  and  he  recommends  that  it  be  made  permanent. 
That  would  be  the  procedure. 

Question.  Now,  where  does  that  recommendation  first  go  ? 

Answer.  It  comes  to  the  department,  and  it  first  reaches 
the  General  Superintendent  of  Railway  Mail  Service,  and 
then  it  is  passed  along  to  the  Division  of  Railway  Adjust- 
ment, where  the  order  is  made,  if  approved. 

Question.  Do  you  pass  it  along  as  received  or  do  you 
make  some  investigation  of  it? 

Answer.  We  exercise  our  judgment  on  the  facts  pre- 
sented. In  the  case  which  I  just  submitted  it  would  speak 
for  itself.  If  emergency  space  had  been  needed  practically 
all  the  time,  why,  it  should  be  made  permanent. 

Question.  Are  the  only  occasions  on  which  there  are 
recommendations  for  increases  in  the  regular  authoriza- 
tions cases  where  there  must  be  a  very  considerable  amount 
of  emergency  space  ? 

Answer.  Those  would  cover  most  of  them.  I  have  just 
spoken  of  a  case  where  a  new  service  is  put  on,  and  if  the"o 
was  an  increase  in  the  emergency  space,  or  some  diversion 
of  the  mail,  we  would  require  additional  storage  cars. 

Question.  Do  you  ever  have  any  correspondence  with 
the  people  in  the  field  about  that,  before  you  turn  it  over 
to  the  next  department? 

Answer.  Very  seldom,  because  the  division  superintend- 
ent generally  makes  his  report  complete.  lie  knows  what 
is  wanted,  and  when  the  papers  reach  the  ofhce  of  the  Gen- 

122698—19 S 


114 

oral  Siiperintoiulent  of  the  Railway  Mail  Service  they  are 
in  such  sha])e  that  we  can  pass  them  along. 

Question.  You  either  approve  or  disapprove,  and  pass 
it  on? 

Answer.  Yes, 

Question.  And  then  what  happens  to  it  ^ 

Answer.  It  goes  to  the  Division  of  Railway  Adjustment, 
and  if  satisfactory  to  them  they  prepare  an  order  for  the 
signatuie  of  the  "Second  Assistant  Postmaster  General. 

Question.  Well,  do  they  ever  conduct  any  further  corre- 
spondence about  it,  either  with  you  or  with  the  men  in  the 
field,  or  do  they  accept  those  recommendations  'i 

Answer.  They  do  not  conduct  any  with  the  men  in  the 
field.  If  they  wanted  additional  information  on  some 
point,  they  would  probably  return  the  papers  to  us  and 
mention  it,  but  that  would  be  an  exception. 

Question.  Do  they  ever  reject  any  recommendations  of 
the  division  superintendent? 

Answer.  Occasionally,  I  think  they  do. 

Question.  After  the  JDivision  of  Railway  Adjustment  has 
passed  on  it,  then  what  do  they  do  '^ 

Answer.  That  is  the  end.  As  I  said,  an  order  would  be 
prepared  for  signature  by  the  Second  Assistant,  and  copies 
of  it  would  go  to  the  railway  company. 

Question.  They  do  submit  it,  then,  to  the  Second  Assist- 
ant? 

Answer.  The  order  is  prepared  for  his  signature.  (R.384- 
389.) 

OPERATING  CONDITIONS   GOVERN  RECOMMENDATIONS 
FOR  ATJIHORIZATIONS. 

Mr.  Knox  testified  on  direct  examination  as  follows: 

Question  (by  Attorney  Examiner  Brown).  What  is  the 
moving  impulse  when  you  make  these  authorizations  or 
recommendations  to  the  department  ?  What  do  you  take 
into  consideration  ? 

***** 

Answer.  The  moving  impulse  is  where  the  mail  already 
carried  in  the  train  is  to  change  the  emergency  authoriza- 
tions to  regular  authorizations  to  get  rid  of  aU  of  the 
emergency  authorizations. 

Question.  I  mean  where  a  carrier  runs  a  60-foot  from 
A  to  B  and  a  30-foot  car  from  B  to  C,  and  then  you  begin 
to  authorize  15  feet  from  C  to  D,  and  7  feet  from  D  to  E, 
and  nothing  from  E  to  F,  and  the  car  runs  through  to  F. 
Now,  when  the  Post  Office  Department  is  considering  the 


115 

allotment  of  space  in  a  train  or  in  cars  in  a  train,  do  you 
take  into  consideration  the  operating  conditions  neces- 
sarily involved  in  the  movement  of  that  train  ? 

Answer.  Not  so  far  as  the  smaller  units  are  concerned. 
We  have,  so  far  as  the  changing  from  60  to  30,  and  dis- 
continuing the  30  feet  and  60  feet,  done  so,  in  at  least  as 
far  as  my  experience  is  concerned,  but  in  the  smaller  units 
no  thought  was  given  to  operating  conditions. 

Question.  You  make  your  authorizations  to  fit  the 
amount  of  business  offered  ? 

***** 

Answer.  The  amount  of  business,  as  far  as  the  storage 
units  and  closed-pouch  space  are  concerned.  If  we  need 
7-foot  down  100  miles,  to  the  divisional  point,  we  change 
it  to  3  feet  from  there  on,  and  discontinue  it  whenever  the 
mail  runs  out. 

Question  (by  Mr.  Stewart).  Mr.  Knox,  are  those  au- 
thorizations of  the  smaller  units  generally,  or,  in  fact, 
-alwa3^s,  accommodated  in  the  make-up  of  the  train 
operated  ? 

Answer.  The  regular  authorizations  ? 

Question.  Yes. 

Answer.  Oh,  yes;  they  have  to  be. 

Question.  So  that,  that  far  the  operating  conditions  of 
the  train  are  taken  into  consideration  ? 

Answer.  Oh,  yes;  so  far  as  that  is  concerned;  yes. 
(R.  3025-3027.) 

CHANGES  OF  UNITS  ARE  MADE   ONLY  AT  DIVISIONAL 
POINTS. 

'Sir.  Gaixes  testified  on  cross-examination  as  follows: 
Question  (by  Mr.  Wood)  .     *     *     *     There  are  numerous 
cases,  are  there  not,  in  wliich  authorization  will  be  reduced 
en  route  from  60  to  30  feet,  or  from  30  feet  to  15  feet? 

Answer.  That  is  true,  and  in  an  investigation  as  to  the 
practicability  of  changing  the  unit  of  space  en  route,  we 
have  had  in  mind  the  possibilit}'  or  the  practicability  of 
operating  that  from  a  Railway  Mail  Service  standpoint,  if 
the  change  were  actually  made  in  the  consist  of  the  train, 
and  that  carries  with  it  the  fact  that  these  changes  are 
only  made  at  divisional  points,  where  it  would  be  possible 
for  the  railroad  company  to  make  the  actual  change  in 
equipment,  if  they  saw  fit  to  do  so.     (R.  184.) 

Mr.  Gaines  testified  on  redirect  examination  as  to  divi- 
sional points  and  changes  in  car  units,  after  reading  para- 
o-raph  20  of  the  Instructions  and  Rulings  with  reference  to 


116 

railnnid  mail  service  (p.  43,  P.  O.  Dept.  Exhibit  No.  1),. 
as  follows: 

Question  (by  Mr.  Stewart)  .  With  reference  to  the  propo- 
sition that  at  divisional  points  a  car  containing  a  reduced  unit 
might  be  substituted  in  the  train  for  one  carried  to  that  point,, 
and  with  respect  to  tlie  time  required  to  do  so,  is  it  not  true 
that  such  change  could  usually  be  made  in  the  dead  time 
of  the  train,  where  switching  is  done  ? 

Answer.  At  some  places,  to  my  knowledge,  that  could 
be  done.  At  other  places,  it  could  not.  *  *  *  That 
is  correct,  gentlemen.  If  the  railroad  company,  at  any 
point  in  the  eleventh  division,  will  specify  any  additional 
point,  I  think  we  could  probably  tell  him  whether  or  not 
the  change  could  be  made  within  the  schedule  time.  Now, 
it  is  true  that  on  a  number  of  lines  in  the  division — I  will 
explain  my  statement  there,  Mr.  Stewart,  to  the  effect 
that  at  many  places  in  the  eleventh  division  no  dead  time 
is  shown.  I'he  train  is  due  to  leave  at  the  same  time 
according  to  schedule  it  is  due  to  arrive,  and,  manifestly, 
at  a  place  of  that  sort  it  would  not  be  possible  to  do  that 
or  perform  any  other  station  service.  We  have  other 
places  where  there  is  an  interval  of  30  minutes,  and  as  this 
mail  unit  has  evidently  been  reduced  materially,  reduced 
en  route,  I  think  at  points  of  that  kind  the  change  could 
be  made  without  any  delay  to  some  of  the  trains.  Now,  on 
some  of  the  fast  trains  it  could  not. 

Question  (by  Mr.  Stewart).  Now,  I  understand  you  to 
mean  that  where  sufficient  and  reasonable  time  is  actually 
included  in  the  schedule  for  ordinary  purposes,  without 
detriment  to  the  schedule  itself,  that  that  could  be  done? 

Answer.  I  think  that  that  is  very  true,  especially  if  ade- 
quate truck  and  porter  service  were  furnished.  (R. 
219-221.) 

DIVISIONAL  POINTS;  DEPARTMENT  DOES  NOT  DICTATE 
TO  RAILROADS  CONCERNING  THE  OPERATION  OF' 
TRAINS. 

Mr.  CoRRiDON  testified  on  re-direct  examination  as  fol- 
lows : 

Question  (by  Mr.  Stewart).  With  reference  to  division 
points,  you  answered  one  of  counsel's  questions  to  the  effect 
that  the  railroad  must  accept  the  conclusion  of  the  depart- 
ment. I  would  like  to  have  you  explain  what  you  meaa 
by  that. 

Answer.  I  meant  by  that  that  the  department  has  a 
ruling  with  respect  to  division  points  that  is  not  intended 


117 

to  conflict  at  all  with  the  railroad  operating  division  point. 
We  do  not  mean  to  indicate  at  what  point  a  railroad  would 
determine  to  be  a  division  point  as  against  the  department. 
It  is  an  expression  we  use  in  the  department  in  adjusting 
services.  We  call  them  nominally  division  points,  but 
they  may  not  be  railway  division  points,  geographically  or 
topographicallv. 

Question.  You  do  not  mean  to  say,  then,  that  the 
department  dictates  to  the  raihoad  company  a  matter 
concerning  the  operation  of  its  trains  ? 

Answer.  We  do  not.     (R.  429,  430.) 

And  on  re-cross  examination  as  f oUows : 

Question  (by  Mr.  Wood).  Whf^t  is  your  definition  of  a 
division  point  as  applied  to  the  mail  service  ? 

Answer.  It  is  where  a  raikoad  makes  changes  in  its 
passenger-train  consist  or  has  switching  facilities  for  making 
such  changes. 

Question.  Do  you  apply  that  to  cases  where,  as  a  matter 
of  fact,  the  point  is  not  a  division  point  for  the  passenger- 
train  service,  and  is  a  division  point  for  freight-train  ser- 
vice ? 

Answer.  I  do  not  believe  I  can  recall  a  case  where  we 
have  held  that  freight-train  switching  facilities  were  to  be 
applied  to  breaking  passenger-train  consists,  within  the 
meaning  of  the  departmental  ruhngs. 

Question.  Do  you  think  you  have  always  confined  it  to 
passenger  division  points  ? 

Answer.  I  tliink  we  have. 

Question.  Do  you  confine  it  to  points  where  the  crews 
of  the  particular  passenger  train  change  ? 

Answer.  No. 

Question.  And  where  switching  is  done  for  that  particu- 
lar passenger  train  ? 

Ajiswer.  When  there  is  a  switch  engine  there  to  perform 
the  switching  service,  or  when  the  locomotive  of  the  train 
performs  it. 

Question.  At  a  point  where  a  train  crew  or  engine  was 
not  changed,  but  which  was  a  division  point  for  some  other 
train  in  the  passenger  service,  you  would  rule  that  it  was 
a  division  point  for  that  train? 

Answer.  If  it  is  a  division  point  for  any  train  moving  to 
that  point  and  breaking  its  consist,  for  our  pur]:»oses  it  is  a 
•division  point  for  the  other  train.     (R.  430,  431.) 


118 

WHEN  THE  RAILROAD  MAKES  THE  CHANGE  OF  UNIT 
THERE  IS  COMPENSATION  FOR  THE  CHANGE. 

In  replying  to  Mi\  Wood's  questions  on  a  hypothetical 
case  as  to  the  practice  of  cutting  out  car  and  transferring 
load,  ^Ii*.  Gaines  testified  on  cross-examination  as  follows: 

Answer.  There  is  always  some  compensation  for  a  change 
of  that  kind.  You  cut  in  a  car  at  a  given  point  on  the  line, 
and  in  many  cases  you  would  be  able  to  load  before  that 
train  arrived  more  mail  than  you  will  have  to  transfer. 
(R.  186.) 

Mi\  Gaines  testified  on  re-direct  examination,  with  refer- 
ence to  the  advantages  of  advance  loading  where  changes 
in  car  units  are  made,  as  follows: 

Question  (by  Mr.  Stewart).  You  referred  just  incident- 
all}'  to  the  advantage  to  the  railroad  companies  in  the  advance 
loading  of  the  car  which  is  spotted  at  this  point.  I  do  not 
think  you  explained  that  so  as  to  bring  out  the  importance 
of  it.  ^  I  wish  you  would  continue  upon  that  point. 

Answer.  Well,  I  will  say  that  at  many  points  in  the 
eleventh  division,  and  doubtless  in  all  others,  more  mail 
could  be  loaded  in  advance  of  the  schedule  time  for  arrival 
of  the  train  where  the  change  was  to  be  made  than  would 
be  involved  in  the  transfer  after  that  train  arrived  at  the 
station,  and,  in  some  cases,  I  believe  the  change  could  be 
made  with  economy  in  time.     (R.  221,  222.) 

TERMINAL  ALLOWANCE  IS  MADE  WHENEVER  THE  CAR 
UNIT  IS  CHANGED. 

Mr.  Brauek,  superintendent,  Railwa}^  Mail  Service, 
Omaha,  Nebr.,  testified  on  re-direct  exammation  as  follows: 

Question  (by  Mr.  Stewart).  Now,  as  a  matter  of  fact, 
it  is  true,  is  it  not,  that  whenever  the  unit  of  that  kind 
changes,  the  terminal  allowance  is  made  ? 

Answer.  Yes,  sir.     (R.  246.) 

OPERATION  OF  CARS  IN  FULFILLMENT  OF  AUTHORIZA- 
TIONS AND  COOPERATION  BETWEEN  RAILROADS 
AND  DEPARTMENT. 

The  following  colloquy  took  place  during  the  cross- 
examination  of  Mr.  Searle  : 

Question  (by  Attorney  Examiner  Brown).  Do  they 
make  these  authorizations  of  the  space  basis  without  con- 
sultation with  you  ? 


119 

Answer.  Oh,  yes;  they  make  the  authorizations  without 
respect  to  us.  Thoy  simply  notify  us  of  what  space  they 
want. 

Question.  Without  regard  to  how  the  train  is  made  up 
or  how  it  is  economical  to  operate,  and  can  be  efficiently 
operated  ? 

Answer.  Yes,  sir. 

***** 

Mr.  Stewart.  I  think  the  gentlemen  are  entirely  mis- 
taken about  that.  The  instructions  and  the  rules  which 
are  embodied  here  express  the  consideration  in  many  cases 
which  the  department  gives  to  the  many  conditions  of  train 
operations.  It  can  not  be  said  for  a  moment  that  the 
department  arbitrarily  authorized  these  things  without 
regard  to  train  operation.  These  rules  in  many  places 
express  the  opposite. 

Question  (by  Mr.  Stewart).  Now,  so  far  as  cooperation 
is  concerned,  it  can  not  be  said  that  the  railroads  have 
always  cooperated  with  the  department,  Mr.  Searle  ? 

Answer,  They  have,  as  far  as  they  could,  consistent  with 
efficient  operation  of  trains. 

Mr.  SteWxVRT.  The  only  difference,  as  it  appears  to  me, 
lies  in  this  point,  that  the  department  attempts  to  authorize 
the  service  in  accordance  with  the  provisions  of  this  act 
and  the  needs  of  the  service,  and  the  railroad  companies 
continue  to  operate  the  cars  they  had  under  the  weight 
basis.  The  Post  Office  Department  desires  to  have  the  pay 
fixed  upon  a  consideration  of  the  needs  of  the  service,  as 
expressed  by  their  authorizations  and  the  railroad  com- 
panies desire  to  have  the  pay,  if  the  space  basis  continues, 
being  fixed  upon  a  consideration  of  the  actual  space 
operated  by  them. 

Attorney  Examiner  Brown.  Well,  use  the  word  there 

The  Witness.  "Necessarily." 

Attorney  Examiner  Brown.  "Necessarily"  operated  by 
them. 

Mr.  Stewart.  And  there  is  a  point  in  dispute  as  to 
whether  or  not  this  space  is  necessarily  operated  to  carry 
out  these  authorizations.     (R.  2119,  2120.) 

DESTINATION  LOADS  IN   SEVERAL  CARS  RUN  BY  THE 
RAILROAD  IN  LIEU  OF  ONE  LOAD  IN  ONE  CAR. 

Mr.  Gaines  testified  on  cross-examination  as  follows: 

Question.  Ordinarily,  you  have  a  full  car  when  you  have 
60-foot  storage.  Now,  i'f  we  take  this  same  illustration  of 
the  train  running  from  A  to  D,  and  the  60-foot  authoriza- 
tion is  reduced  to  30  feet  at  B,  what  will  the  railroad  com- 
pany do  ? 


120 

Answer.  Cut  out  the  car  that  they  do  not  need,  or  else, 
as  we  have  permitted  tlie  raih-oad  compaTues  to  do  for  their 
own  benefit,  make  destination  loads  at  the  initial  point  of 
baggage,  mail,  and  express  in  two  or  more  ears,  and  let 
them  run  as  baggage,  mail,  and  express  through,  and  pay 
the  railroad  company  for  the  storage  car  as  long  as  there 
is  60  feet  of  space  used  in  storage  in  the  train. 

Question.  But  you  have  reduced  that  storage  from  60 
feet  down  to  30  feet.  Now,  the  railroad  company  has 
either  got  to  carry  that  60-foot  car  through — that  equip- 
ment and  30  feet  of  space  through  that  is  already  in  it — or 
it  has  to  out  that  car  out  and  put  in  another  car  ? 

Answer.  Not  in  the  case 

Question,  And  transfer  the  mail. 

Answer.  Not  in  a  case  like  the  one  I  speak  of,  and  it  has 
been  arranged  to  excellent  advantage  for  the  railroad  com- 
panies and  the  department. 

Question.  But  that  would  assume  that  they  really 
needed  60  feet  all  the  way  through. 

Answer.  No,  sir;  I  beg  your  pardon.  May  I  state  a  con- 
crete example  ? 

Question.  Yes. 

Answer.  There  is  a  storage  car  paid  for  by  the  depart- 
ment between  St.  Louis  and  Palestine,  approximately  600 
miles,  we  will  say.  Now,  that  storage  car,  for  which  the 
department  pays  the  regular  storage  rate  of  21  cents  a  mile 
each  way,  is  satisfied  by  loading  40  feet  in  the  San  Antonio 
baggage  car  and  20  feet  in  the  Houston  baggage  car. 
There  is  no  shifting  of  load  en  route.  I  believe  that  could 
be  worked  out  to  excellent  advantage,  so  as  to  get  away,  in 
a  great  many  cases,  from  just  such  propositions  as  you  have 
in  mind  there.  The  destination  load  is  made  at  St.  Louis 
on  the  mail,  baggage,  and  express,  and  goes  through  to  San 
Antonio  and  Houston,  respectively,  without  any  transfer 
en  route.  It  is  true  that  in  other  cases  the  unit  is  reduced 
en  route.  The  *  *  *  space  *  *  *  vacated  by  the 
mail  and  baggage  *  =!^  *  can  be  utilized  by  the  rail- 
road company  just  as  they  can  utilize  the  space  vacated 
by  a  passenger  who  buys  a  ticket  halfway  over  a  line, 
instead  of  buying  a  ticket  all  the  way  through.  (R.  189- 
191.) 

OPERATION  OF  CARS  UNDER  THE  SPACE  SYSTEM  THE 
SAME  AS  UNDER  THE  WEIGHT  SYSTEM. 

Mr.  Gaines  testified  on  cross-examination  as  follows: 

Question  (by  Mr.  Wood).  In  a  great  many  cases  the 
unit  is  changed  en  route,  and  where,  at  least  as  the  cars 
are  operating  to-day,  there  is  a  saving  accomplished  in  the 


121 

amount  which  the  raih'oad  company  gets  from  the  Post 
Office  Department  but  absokitelj^  no  saVhig  in  the  amount 
of  equipment  which  they  haul  ? 

Answer.  That  is  true  in  some  cases,  of  course. 

Question.  Well,  it  is  true  in  a  great  many  cases,  is  it 
not,  in  all  classes  of  service,  the  railway  post  office,  the 
storage,  and  the  baggage  car  ? 

***** 

Question  (by  Attorney  Examiner  Brown).  Well,  would 
not  that  be  true  if  you  had  a  weight  basis,  where  your 
car  starts  out  full,  and  halfway  it  was  half  empty  ?  You 
would  not  give  the  full  weight  through,  would  you? 

Answer.  No;  they  did  not  get  paid  based  upon  the 
quadrennial  weighing,  except  for  part.     (R.  192,  193.) 

Mr.  Gaines  testified  on  re-direct  examination  that  more 
"dead  space"  or  excessive  operation  of  car  space  occurred 
under  the  weight  system  than  under  the  space  system 
under  the  same  state  of  tacts,  as  follows: 

Question  (by  Mr.  Stewart).  Reference  was  made  to  the 
practice  under  the  weight  basis  in  regard  to  the  amoimt  of 
payment  received  by  the  company  for  the  services  per- 
formed over  a  run,  where  the  weights  diminished  en 
route,  as  compared  with  the  practice  under  the  space  basis, 
where  the  company  receives  pay  for  these  several  sizes  of 
units,  and  the  company  sees  fit  to  carry  the  car  through 
to  the  end  of  the  train  run.  Now,  I  will  ask  you  whether 
it  is  not  practically  a  parallel  case  where,  in  the  first  in- 
stance, the  company  received  pay  for  the  average  daily 
weight  of  mails  carried  over  the  whole  route,  which  took 
into  consideration  these  reductions  in  the  amounts  of  mail 
carried  over  the  several  parts,  and  makes  it  comparable  with 
the  case  supposed  under  the  space  system  i. 

Mr.  AsHBAUGH.  We  object  to  the  form  of  the  question, 
Mr.  Examiner,  as  purely  argumentative,  and  this  is  direct 
examination. 

Attorney  Examiner  Brown.  The  objection  is  noted. 
Let  him  answer. 

Answer.  In  my  judgment,  it  is  clearly  comparable,  and 
in  the  cross-examination  I  made  the  statement  to  the  same 
efi'ect,  that  whether  on  the  v.'eight  or  the  space  basis,  the 
amount  of  service  performed  was  influenced  by  the  dis- 
patch of  a  considerable  amount  of  mail  at  a  given  point 
en  route. 

Attorney  Examiner  Brown.  Of  course,  I  am  still  not 
satisfied,  and  that  does  not  answer  the  question  which  was 
propounded  by  Mr.  Wood  as  to  the  matter  to  which  he 
was  directing  his  examination,  and  that  is  if  you  require  a 


122 

60-foot  car  at  the  start,  niul  there  is  at  an  intermediate 
point  a  reduction  of  the  mail  matter  to  such  an  extent 
that  it  woukl  take  a  30-foot  car,  operating  conditions  are 
such  that  you  can  not  make  an  exchange  there  and  make 
your  train  connections  and  haul  the  60-foot  car  through, 
and  his  question  was  if  the  carrier  there  did  not  haul  a 
60-foot  car  at  least  half  the  distance  when  it  was  not 
necessary. 

Question  (by  Attorney  Examiner  Brown).  Now,  did  not 
that,  as  a  matter  of  fact,  occur  when  you  had  the  weight 
basis;  that  is  to  sa}',  you  started  out  with  a  car  full;  when 
you  got  half  or  two-thirds  of  the  way  it  was  only  part  full, 
but  you  still  carried  the  car  through  ? 

Answer.  We  carried  a  great  deal  more  dead  space  under 
the  weight  basis  than  under  the  space  basis. 

***** 

Attorney  Examiner  Brown.  Do  you  wish  to  argue  the 
matter,  Mr.  Stewart? 

Mr.  Stewart.  I  do  not  think  it  necessary  at  this  time 
to  enter  upon  an  argument  with  reference  to  the  rates  of 
pay,  or  the  adequacy  or  inadequacy  of  the  pay  for  the 
service  rendered;  but  if  I  had  anything  to  say  it  would  be 
this,  that  the  two  cases  are  absolutely  comparable,  and 
that  by  the  testimony  of  this  witness  it  is  shown  that 
the  companies  voluntarily  furnished  a  greater  amount  of 
space  to  carry  a  given  amount  of  weight,  and  were  satisfied 
with  receiving  pay  on  the  basis  of  weight,  while  they  now 
operate  to  carry  the  same  amount  of  mails  ancl  are  paid 
at  a  greater  rate  than  they  were  under  the  weight  basis 
for  the  same  service  rendered,  in  furnishing  the  same 
facilities.     (R.  222-225.) 

ASCERTAINMENT  OF  FACTS  AS  TO  SERVICE  NEEDED 
AND  WEIGHTS  CARRIED  MADE  LARGELY  BY  CLERKS 
IN  THE  FIELD  UNDER  EITHER  BASIS. 

Mr.  Gaines  testified  on  re-direct  examination  as  follows: 
Question  (by  Mr.  Stewart),  I  am  asking  you  particu- 
larly about  the  manner  in  which  this  volume  of  mail  is 
ascertained  under  this  system  as  it  now  exists,  which 
Mr.  Wood  brought  out  on  cross-examination,  that  that 
lies  largely  with  the  determination  of  the  facts  by  the 
clerks  in  the  field.  Now,  I  will  ask  you  if  it  is  not  true 
that  if  we  were  weighing  the  mails,  in  order  to  ascertain 
the  basis  for  adjustment,  the  same  clerks  would  not  have 
to  weigh  the  mails  on  and  off  at  every  station  ? 

Answer.  Mr.  Wood  proposes  to  have  the  station  bag- 
gagemen do  that. 


123 

Question.  Very  well.  That  will  be  still  worse,  but  I 
am  asking  you  what  the  system  would  be,  making  it  en- 
tirely comparable  with  the  assumption  of  Mr.  Wood's 
question. 

:(:  *  5f:  Hs  * 

Question.  Now,  he  assumes  that  the  clerks  are  counting 
these  bags  on  and  off,  and  I  ask  you  whether  or  not,  if  we 
had  a  weighing  system,  and  weighing  had  to  be  conducted 
by  somebody  on  the  trains,  that  that  weighing  would 
not  be  done  by  the  postal  clerks  on  the  train,  but  by  the 
postal  clerks  with  the  assistance  of  regular  weighers 
employed  ? 

Answer.  I  do  not  see  any  other  possible  way  to  have 
it  done  and  have  it  done  accurately. 

Question  (by  Mr.  Wood).  Three  hundred  and  sixty-five 
days  a  year  ? 

Answer.  No;  I  mean  for  the  statistical  period. 

Mr.  Stewart.  The  basis  might  be  determined  upon  an 
average  ascertained  over  the  period,  just  as  the  law  has 
provided. 

Question  (by  Mr.  Stewart).  Is  there  absolutely  any 
difference  in  that  system,  so  far  as  those  facts  are  con- 
cerned ? 

Answer.  So  far  as  having  to  depend,  in  the  final  analysis, 
on  the  man  on  the  train  to  ascertain  the  amount  of  mail 
carried;  no,  sir.     (R.  3369-3371.) 

THE  RAILROADS  DO  NOT  RESERVE  OR  HOLD  EXCLU- 
SIVELY FOR  THE  MAILS  SPACE  AUTHORIZED  FOR 
MAILS  IN  BAGGAGE  CARS. 

Ml".  Gaixes  testified  on  direct  examination  as  follows : 

Question  (by  Mr.  Stewart).  Now,  you  heard  the  testi- 
mony of  the  witnesses  to  the  effect  that  authorizations  in 
baggage  cars  of  smaller  units  are  held  by  the  railroad 
companies  exclusi^-ely  for  the  mails.  What  have  you  to 
say  in  regard  to  that,  based  upon  your  experience  in  the 
service  ? 

/Vnsvrer.  I  can  not  believe  that  they  are  held  for  the 
exclusive  use  of  the  mails  when  we  do  not  occupy  all  of  the 
space  authorizations  with  mail  in  the  train.  Tt  has  come 
unckn-  m}^  personal  knowledge  a  niimbor  of  times  where 
the  s])ace  was  encroached  upon.  We  have  no  quarrel 
with  them  if  we  do  not  need  the  space.  The  mail  fluctu- 
ates. Sometimes  we  need  more  and  sometimes  wo  need 
less.  If  we  do  not  have  it  in  use  at  the  time,  the  railroad 
company,  doubtless,  and  in  cases  that  have  come  under 
my  Icnowledge,  does  use  that  space  for  baggage,  express,, 
or  for  any  other  purpose  it  may  desire. 


121 

Quostion.  So  far  as  yom*  experience  is  concerned  and 
Toiu-  ol)servation  of  the  service,  it  is  not  correct  that  when 
these  small  units  of  space  are  .made  or  are  authorized  the 
raih-oads  in  actual  practice  reserve  that  space  exclusively 
for  the  mails  in  the  operation  of  their  trains  ? 

Answer.  I  am  very  sure  that  they  do  not.  (K.  3229, 
32;^0.) 

OPERATION  OF  CARS  THROUGH  UNDER  REDUCED 
AUTHORIZATIONS  NOT  TYPICAL  IN  TERRITORY  WEST 
OF  MISSOURI  RIVER. 

Mr.  Knox  testified  on  cross-examination  as  follows: 

Question  (by  Mr.  Wood).  *  *  *  The  fact  of  the  mat- 
ter is  that  over  this  country  there  are  scores  and  scores  of 
cases  in  which,  since  the  space  basis  was  put  mto  effect, 
and  since  April,  the  authorizations  for  railway  post-office 
cars  and  apartment-car  service  have  been  reduced  en 
route  during  the  run  of  the  car,  when  it  was  a  well-known 
fact  on  the  'part  of  the  division  supermtendent  that  the 
railroad  company  was  going  to  be  required  to  operate  that 
car  clear  through  to  destination;  is  not  that  so? 

Answer.  I  have  heard  testimony  to  that  effect;  yes. 

Question.  And  that  testimony  you  know  is  typical  of  the 
situation  throughout  the  country,  do  you  not  ? 

iVnswer.  Not  throughout  the  country;  no. 

Question.  You  think  it  is  not  ? 

Answer.  It  is  not. 

Question.  Where  does  it  not  exist  ? 

i\jiswer.  It  does  not  exist  to  any  great  extsnt  in  the 
entire  territory  west  of  the  Missouri  Iliver. 

Question.  Have  you  discussed  that  with  M\  Brauer  ? 

Answ^er.  I  have  not. 

Question.  You  have  no  knowledge  of  the  situation  on 
his  lines  in  that  respect  ? 

Answer.  Well,  he  probably  has  a  Ime  or  two  where  it 
may  occur,  but  that  does  not  make  it  typical  and  repre- 
sentative.    (K.  3073,  3074.) 

REDUCTIONS  IN  AUTHORIZED  SPACE  UNDER  THE  SPACE 
SYSTEM  HAVE  BEEN  THE  RESULT  OF  DISCONTINU- 
ANCE OF  TRAIN  SERVICE  AND  OF  THE  CONSOLIDA- 
TIONS OF  LOADS.  THE  CONSEQUENT  RELEASE  OF 
RAILROAD  EQUIPMENT  HAS  MET  WITH  THE  RAIL- 
ROADS'  APPROVAL. 

Ml'.  Gaines  testified  on  dhect  exammation  as  follows: 

Question  (by  Mr.  Stewart).  Keference  was  made  by  the 
witnesses  to  the  reduction  of  space  during  the  past  year. 
Will  you  name  some  of  the  reasons  why  the  service  has 
been  reduced  ? 


125 

Answer.  Reductions  in  authorizations  were  due  largely 
to  the  discontinuance  of  a  orreat  deal  of  passenger-train 
service  which  was  made  over  the  enthe  country  under  the 
Railroad  Admmistration's  orders  so  as  to  eliminate  that 
which  was  not  essential  under  war  conditions.  It  Avas  also 
due  m  part  to  consolidation  of  loads,  as  was  accomplished 
on  some  lines  to  a  very  great  extent,  systematically,  and 
at  the  request  of  the  railroad  companies,  as,  for  instance, 
on  the  New  York  Central  Imes.  That  action  resulted  in 
utilizing  space  in  storage  cars  to  an  extent  never  accom- 
plished before,  relieving  the  fast  passenger  trains  of  han- 
dling such  cars,  having  them  moved,  where  practicable,  on 
slower  trains,  wlierever  that  could  be  done  without  detri- 
ment to  the  service.  The  New  York  Central  officials  coop- 
erated m  the  movement,  and  in  fact  urged  that  it  be  taken 
for  the  benefit  of  the  railroad  company.  This  consolida- 
tion of  loads  released  for  other  purposes  a  large  amount  of 
equipment  which  would  otherwise  have  been  partly 
loaded. 

Question.  So  that,  if  I  understand  3'ou  correctly,  the 
reductions  in  the  service,  so  far  as  it  affected  the  operation 
of  equipment  which  would  be  utilized  by  the  companies, 
has  met  with  their  approval  and  their  cooperation  ? 

.Vnswer.  Yes,  sir.     (R.  3230,3231.) 

RAILWAY  POST  OFFICE  CARS. 

MANNER    OF     MAKING    AUTHORIZATIONS     FOR     SPACE 
UNITS. 

Air.  Knox  testified,  on  direct  examination,  as  follows: 

Question  (by  Mr.  Stewart)  .  Now,  will  you  describe  the 
manner  in  which  authorizations  are  made  for  the  several 
units  of  car  service,  beginning  with  the  obsei'vation  or 
investigation  in  the  field  and  following  the  subject  through 
the  various  stages  up  to  the  authorization  by  the  depart- 
ment?    *     *     * 

Answer.  Regular  authorizations  are  made  by  the  depart- 
ment in  Washington,  and  I  will  show  in  detail,  as  informa- 
tion,, the  method  pursued  in  handling  these  authorizationa 
of  regular  space  from  time  of  beginning  investigation  until 
payment  is  made  to  railroad  companies. 

If  service  on  a  train  not  previously  used  on  a  route  not 
already  authorized  for  service,  or  if  additional  distributing 
space  or  storage  space  in  any  train  in  which  authorization 
is  now  made  is  deemed  necessary,  the  proceeding  is  prac- 
tically as  follows : 

A  chief  clerk  or  division  superintendent  makes  a  per- 
sonal investigation  and  the  actual  needs  as  to  space  are 


12G 

determined.  If  new  service  is  thought  necessary  on  an 
existing  route,  report  shows  the  number  of  pieces  of  mail  to 
be  advanced  by  the  establishment  of  such  service,  the  time 
to  be  saved  by  such  establishment,  and  all  other  benefits 
that  may  accrue  by  reason  of  the  proposed  authorization. 
If  an  increase  in  existing  space  is  desired  in  a  train  already 
authorized,  report  is  made  showing  the  separations  neces- 
sary, providing  the  additional  space  is  of  the  distributing 
nature.  If  additional  storage  space  is  necessary  the  fact 
is  determined  by  examination  of  emergency  authorizations 
during  a  month  just  prior  to  making  the  report.  If  these 
emergency  authorizations  show  space  used  at  least  120  times 
in  the  month  in  question,  then  recommendation  is  made 
for  a  unit  of  regular  space  sufficient  to  cover  the  emergency 
mails  previously  carried.     *     *     * 

Reports  covering  space  authorizations  are  made  by  the 
division  superintendent  to  the  general  superintendent  at 
Washington,  who  approves  or  disapproves,  as  may  appear 
in  his  judgment  proper.  If  approved,  the  recommenda- 
tion is  then  referred  to  the  Division  of  Railway  Adjust- 
ments, Bureau  of  the  Second  Assistant,  where  further 
review  is  given  to  the  report.  So  far  as  authorizations  for 
establishment  of  railway  post  office  or  apartment  service 
is  concerned,  the  decision  of  the  Railway  Mail  Service  is 
generally  final — that  is,  of  the  general  superintendent's 
office — the  Division  of  Railway  Adjustments  as  a  rule 
issuing  the  formal  order.  In  relation  to  additional  space 
deemed  necessary,  based  on  emergency  authorizations,  the 
Division  of  Railway  Adjustments  makes  final  decision. 
However,  in  these  cases  the  statement  of  the  division 
superintendent  as  to  the  emergency  space  which  has  not 
been  reported  to  the  department  is  almost  without  excep- 
tion deemed  sufficient  evidence  on  which  to  authorize  addi- 
tional regular  service.  When  the  recommendation  of  the 
division  supermtendent  is  approved,  the  company  is 
notified  informally.     *     *     * 

A  formal  order  is  also  prepared  in  the  Division  of  Rail- 
way Adjustments,  copies  of  same  being  transmitted  to  the 
railroad  company,  the  office  of  general  superintendent, 
and  the  division  superintendent.  This  formal  order  is  in 
a  form  that  indicates  the  train  involved,  the  points  between 
which  service  is  to  be  authorized,  the  distance  in  miles, 
the  class  of  service  authorized,  number  of  one-way  trips 
per  annum,  miles  of  service  per  annum,  rate  per  mile, 
annual  rate,  initial  and  terminal  allowance,  annual  rate 
initial  and  terminal  allowance.  The  form,  in  addition  to 
the  foregoing,  gives  the  route  number,  date  of  order,  old 
length  of  route,  new  length  of  route,  line  pay,  initial  and 


127 

terininal  allowance,  and  total  pay,  both  old  and  new;  that 
is,  prior  to  the  issuance  of  the  order  and  subsequent  to  its 
issuance.  The  order  is  given  a  formal  number,  increase  or 
decrease  in  pay,  and  increase  and  decrease  in  length  of 
route  is  shown,  also  the  date  the  company  was  notified 
informally. 

That  completes  the  information  to  the  company  upon 
which  it  bases  its  affidavit. 

Question.  That  gives  the  company  all  the  possible  infor- 
mation that  is  needed  to  inform  itself,  first,  as  to  what 
ser\-ice  already  authorized  is  superseded  or  changed,  and 
as  to  the  service  which  is  authorized  in  the  future  to  take 
its  place  ? 

Answer.  The  informal  letter  embraces  all  information, 
and  the  formal  order  furnishes  other  information  that  is 
needed  by  the  company  in  preparing  its  affidavit.  It  is 
not  necessarv  for  the  formal  order  to  reach  them  so  soon. 
(R.  3017-3022.) 

PERMANENT  AUTHORIZATIONS  TO  SUPERSEDE  EMER- 
GENCY AUTHORIZATIONS. 

Mr.  Knox  testified,  on  direct  examination,  as  follows: 

Question  (by  Mr.  Stewart)  .  Now,  emergency  service,  as 
I  understand  you,  represents  that  fluctuating  part  of  the 
service  which  is  the  index  of  either  the  growth  or  diminution 
of  the  service  upon  a  line  ? 
-     Answer.  That  is  correct;  yes,  sir. 

Question.  And  that  is  carefully  observed  and  accounted 
for,  and  when  the  increases  average  something  like  uni- 
formity on  20  days,  it  is  recommended  to  be  taken  up  and 
made  regular  permanent  service  ? 

Answer.  A  regular  permanent  unit  of  space  is  recom- 
mended then  to  take  the  place  of  this  emergency  mail  that 
was  carried  previously.     (R.  3019.) 

RELATIVE  IMPORTANCE  OF  SERVICE  PERFORMED  IN 
FULL  RAILWAY  POST-OFFICE  CARS  AND  APART- 
MENT RAILWAY  POST-OFFICE  CARS. 

Mr.  Knox  testified  on  direct  examination  as  follows: 

Question  (by  Mr.  Stewart),  Now,  what  is  the  relative 
importance  of  the  service  performed  in  the  60-foot  railway 
postr-office  cars,  30-foot  apartment  cars,  and  15-foot  apart- 
ment cars;  first,  with  respect  to  the  miles  of  service  per- 
formed per  annum  by  each  unit  as  such,  and,  second,  with 
respect  to  the  miles  of  service  performed  per  annum  on  the 
equated  60-foot  car- mile  basis?  Here  are  exhibits  which 
may  assist  you. 


128 

Answer.  According  to  PostOfFice  Department  Exhibit  No. 
5,  the  per  cent  of  miles  of  service  per  annum  performed  by 
the  60-foot  full  railway  post-ofhce  cars  as  such  units  was 
15.46;  the  per  cent  of  miles  per  annum  performed  by  the 
30-foot  apartment  railway  post-ofTice  cars  as  such  units  was 
26.05;  and  the  per  cent  of  miles  per  annum  performed  by 
the  15-foot  apartment  railway  post-ofhce  cars  as  such  units 
was  17.40.  However,  when  the  car-miles  performed  by  the 
30-foot  apartment  units  and  the  15-foot  apartment  units 
are  equated  to  60-foot  car-miles,  the  per  cents  are  as  follows: 
For  60-foot  railway  post-office  cars,  34.16  per  cent;  for  30- 
foot  partment  cars,  28.78  per  cent;  for  15-foot  apartment 
cars,  9.61  per  cent. 

Question  (by  Mr.  Wood).  As  of  what  date  are  those 
figures,  Mr.  Knox  ? 

***** 

Mr.  Stewart.  March  27,  1917. 

***** 

Question  (by  Mr.  Stewart).  And  the  last  figures  you 
gave  were  from  Post  Office  Department  Exhibit  51  ? 
Answer.  Fifty-one. 
Question.  Covering  the  same  period  ? 
Answer.  Yes,  sir.      (R.  3015-3017.) 

DISTRIBUTING  UNIT  CHANGED  TO  NEXT  HIGHER  UNIT 
ONLY  WHEN  ADDITIONAL  STORAGE  SPACE  NEEDED 
IN  BOTH  DIRECTIONS. 

Mr.  Knox  testified  on  direct  examination  as  follows: 

Question  (by  Mr.  Stewart).  Now,  you  have  described 
the  elements  which  primarily  influence  the  recommendation 
for  additional  distribution  space.  I  will  ask  you  whether 
there  are  any  exceptions  to  that  rule  ? 

Answer.  There  is  only  one  exception  to  the  rule  of  basing 
authorizations  for  distributing  space  solely  on  the  separa- 
tions necessary,  and  the  amount  of  working  mails  to  be 
carried  is  covered  by  rule  22,  found  on  page  43  of  Post 
Office  Department  Exhibit  No.  1,  as  defined  by  depart- 
ment's letter  of  September  26,  1918,  reading,  in  part,  as 
follows: 

The  words  "  in  Ijotli  directions  "  as  used  in  rule  22  have  heretofore  been 
interpreted,  when  authorizing  space,  as  meaning  that  where,  for  example, 
a  15-fo'jt  apartment  car  is  sufficient  for  the  distrilniting  needg_  of  the 
round  trip  and  3  feet  or  7  feet  of  space  additional  is  needed  in  both 
directions  between  any  points  on  the  apartment  car  run,  the  next  higher 
apartment  car  unit  of  space  ^vill  be  authorized  between  the  divisional 
points  which  include  that  part  of  the  route  over  which  additional  space 
is  needed  in  both  dii-ections.  The  foUovang  example  illustrates  this 
interpretation: 


129 

A  route  is  authorized  from  A  to  D._  In  a  certain  train  a  l5-foot  apart- 
ment car  unit  is  sufficient  for  the  distributing  needs  over  the  entire  route. 
B  beina;  a  divLsional  point,  an  additional  3-foot  storage  unit  being  required 
from  A  to  B.  and  an  additional  7-foot  storage  unit  from  B  to  A.  Under 
such  a  condition  a  30-foot  apartment  car  unit  of  space  would  be  authorized 
between  A  and  B  and  a  15-foot  apartment  car  unit  between  B  and  T>.  In 
case  B  is  not  a  divisional  point,  a  30-foot  apartment  car  unit  of  space 
would  be  authorized  between  A  and  D. 

Question.  Then,  the  distributing  unit  is  raised  to  the  next 
denomination,  when  the  additional  space  is  required  in  both 
directions  between  the  same  points  ? 

Answer.  Between  any  two  points. 

Question.  Between  any  two  points? 

Answer.  Yes,  sir. 

Question.  And  if  that  requirement  falls  between  points 
along  the  route,  marked,  for  instance,  by  a  point  where 
there  is  no  divisional  point,  as  the  railroads  may  term  it, 
the  authorization  is  made  through  to  the  end  of  the  route  ? 

Answer.  Through  the  length  of  the  car  run,  if  there  is  no 
divisional  point  on  the  run  of  the  car. 

Rule  22  provides  that  where  a  certain  distributing  unit 
of  less  than  60-foot  is  sufficient  for  the  distribution  needs 
of  a  round  trip  and  additional  storage  space  is  authorized 
in  both  directions,  the  authorization  lor  the  run  will  be  the 
next  higher  distributing  unit  and  will  be  paid  for  if  operated, 
or  any  pro  rata  of  the  higher  unit's  pay  will  be  paid  for  if 
a  car  in  excess  of  the  distribution  needs  is  operated  which  is 
not  as  long  as  the  next  higher  unit.  Circular  letter  of 
September  26,  1918,  that  I  have  just  read,  defines  a  round 
trip  as  the  constructive  round  trip  of  a  car  between  two 
divisional  points,  which  divisional  points  are  defined  by 
rule  20,  page  43,  of  Post  Office  Department  Exhibit  No.  1. 
***** 

The  effect  of  this  rule  and  the  definition  thereof  is  to 
increase  the  distributing  authorization  of  many  runs  from 
15-foot  to  30-foot,  and  from  30-foot  to  60-foot,  for  any 
round  trip  between  any  two  divisional  points  if  any  storage 
mail  is  carried  in  both  directions  between  any  two  points 
in  that  particular  division.  However,  should  there  be  a 
storage  authorization  in  addition  to  the  distributing 
author iz.^t ion  in  one  direction,  which  storage  authori- 
zation terminates  at  any  intermediate  point  on  the  run, 
and  a  storage  authorization  is  necessary  als«  in  the 
train  run  in  the  opposite  direction  between  terminal  and 
any  intermediate  point,  then  the  distributing  authorization 
will  not  be  increased  to  the  next  higher  unit  unless  the  stor- 
age runs  out  of  each  terminal  overlap.  If  they  do  overlap, 
then  the  distributing  unit  will  be  increased  over  the  entire 

122698—19 9 


130 

run  of  the  train  if  confined  to  any  one  division  or  over  any 
division  in  which  the  storage  units  overlap  if  the  train  run 
e-Vceeds  one  division.  ITnder  the  circumstances  just  related 
there  is  no  point  on  the  run  of  the  train  where  the  next 
higher  unit  of  distributing  space  should  be  authorized  unless 
storage  operates  in  both  directions  between  any  two  points. 
This  covers  the  case  cited  by  Mr.  Searle,  witness  for  the  rail- 
roads, in  his  testimony  in  relation  to  the  Enid  and  Waurika 
(Okla.)    railway  post  office.     (R.  3035-303S.) 

NUMBER  OF  AUTHORIZATIONS  IN  FULL  RAILWAY  POST- 
OFFICE  CARS  AND  APARTMENT  CARS  REDUCED  EN 
ROUTE. 

Ml-.  Brauer  testified  on  direct  examination  as  follows: 

Now,  we  have  all  over  the  service  1,386  30-foot  regular 
authorizations,  apartment  cars,  distributing  cars;  1,138  of 
them  continue  over  the  route  without  change. 

Question  (by  Attorney  Examiner  Brown).  Under  your 
present  rules  ? 

Answer.  Under  our  present  rules. 

Question.  And  you  pay  for  them  ? 

Answer.  And  we  pay  for  them  in  both  ways. 

Question.  How  many  did  you  say? 

Answer.  One  thousand  one  hundred  and  thirty-eight; 
248  cases  we  have  in  the  service,  as  my  figures  show,  where 
a  30  is  changed  to  a  15  somewhere  over  the  route.  That 
also  answers  Mr.  Wood's  question,  I  think,  as  to  whether 
these  cases  are  typical  that  we  have  in  30-foot  authoriza- 
tions. 

H;  *  *  *  * 

Now,  in  talking  about  apartment-car  service,  we  have 
2,653  15-foot  apartment-car  distributing  authorizations, 
and  all  but  99  are  paid  over  the  route. 

Question.  Going  and  coming  ? 

Answer.  Going  and  coming  always.  We  have  496  60- 
foot  distributing-car  authorizations,  and  in  that  case,  too, 
all  but  99  are  paid  for  over  the  route.  Those  go  from  60 
to  30.     (R.  3387,  3388.) 

STORAGE  CARS. 

PAY  FOR  DISTRIBUTION  AND  STORAGE  CAR  UNITS 
BASED  UPON  THE  ROUND  TRIP  OF  CARS. 

Mr.  Knox  testified  on  direct  examination  as  follows: 

AU  distributing  authorizations  and  full-storage  cars  are 
paid  for  on  a  round-trip  basis.  This  applies  to  all  storage 
cars  used  in  one  direction  in  regard  to  which  the  company 
can  make  affidavit  that  a  return  empty  movement  was 


131 

made.  A  car  clue  to  return  from  Seattle  to  St.  Paul,  for 
instance,  empty,  may  operate  to  Spokane  and  there  be  used 
by  the  company  on  other  business,  either  east,  north, 
south,  or  west.  At  Spokane,  another  car  may  be  substi- 
tuted in  some  train  or  any  train  following  on  subsequent 
date  for  the  car  used  at  that  point,  and  this  substituted 
car  may  be  diverted  and  placed  in  traffic  at  Havre,  for 
instance.  Another  car  may  be  used  to  complete  the  run 
from  Havre  to  St.  Paul,  the  only  requirement  being  that 
the  company  make  an  affidavit  that  a  return  movement, 
irrespective  of  any  particular  car,  was  made  to  complete 
the  outward  movement  in  which  the  car  was  used  by  the 
department. 

Question  (by  Mr.  Stewart)  .  Now,  as  I  understand  that, 
the  department  does  not  require  that  the  car  for  which  they 
paid  the  return  movement  shall  return  in  the  immediate 
train,  but  may  be  returned  at  any  reasonable  time,  com- 
plying with  the  operating  conditions  of  the  road  ? 

Answer.  And  over  any  particular  section  of  the  line. 

Question.  Yes,  sir. 

Answer.  As  the  raih^oad  company  finds  it  expedient  to 
handle  it.     (R.  3023|,  3024.) 

EMPTY   RETURN  MOVEMENT   OF   STORAGE   CARS   PAID 
FOR  UNLESS  CARS  USED  BY  COMPANY. 

Mr.  Knox  testified  on  direct  examination  as  follows: 

By  agreement  the  department  will  authorize  payment 
for  a  return  storage  movement  over  a  portion  of  any  par- 
ticular route  or  routes  under  circumstances  as  follows: 
The  company  may  ffiid  it  necessary  in  the  course  of  hand- 
ling its  business  to  use  the  storage  cars  over  a  portion  of 
the  car  run.  This  is  a  return  movement.  If  so,  the  de- 
partment will  pay  for  the  return  movement  of  the  car  over 
other  portions  of  the  entire  car  run  provided  affidavit  is 
made  that  these  other  portions  were  covered  by  the  empty 
car  movement.  If  such  an  agreement  is  made,  it  is  fm'ther 
stipulated  that  any  emergency  car  movement  operating  in 
the  same  direction  and  over  the  same  portion  of  route  as 
that  section  where  the  company  uses  the  return  movement 
of  regular  storage  cars  will  be  paid  for  in  one  direction 
only.  This  is  to  avoid  paying  for  a  round-trip  movement 
of  an  emergency  storage  car  where  for  convenience  of  the 
company  the  department  an-anges  for  the  return  move- 
ment of  the  regular  storage  car  to  be  used  in  company's 
business. 

Question  (by  Mr.  Stewart)  .  Then,  as  I  understand  from 
that,  the  department  arranges  for  payment  for  a  return 
movement,  although  that  return  movement  may  not  coin- 


132 

cide  outirely  with  the  outward  run  from  terminal  to  ter- 
minal '( 

Answer.  That  is  correct;  yes,  sir;  permitting  the  com- 
pany to  use  the  car,  if  it  can  do  so  to  advantage,  over  any 
portion  of  the  car  run  for  the  return  movement.  *  *  * 
The  only  deduction  made  in  connection  with  the  return 
movement  of  empty  storage  cars  is  the  initial  and  terminal 
allowance  one  way  on  the  deadhead  movement — this  al- 
lowance not  being  made  as  no  service  to  the  department 
is  l)eing  furnished.     (R.  3024,  3025.) 

CHANGES  IN  RAILWAY  POST-OFFICE  OR  STORAGE  CAR 
UNITS  BETWEEN  TERMINALS. 

Mr.  Gaines  testified  on  cross-examination  as  foUows: 

Question  (by  Mr.  Wood).  Now,  in  connection  with  the 
operation  of  these  train  facilities,  have  you  any  cases  on 
your  division  where  the  authorized  space  in  railway  post 
office  or  apartment  cars  varies  between  different  points 
along  the  run  of  those  cars  ? 

Answer.  *  *  *  To  state  a  case,  we  have  a  car  which 
runs  from  St.  Louis  to  San  Antonio.  Those  cars  are 
run  at  the  option  of  the  railroad  companies.  They  are 
run  through,  it  is  presumed,  to  avoid  transfer  of  mail  en 
route  and  as  an  economical  measure  in  the  way  of  reduced 
number  of  cars  that  would  otherwise  be  necessary  to  pro- 
tect the  service.  Now,  over  the  length  of  that  run  of  over 
1,000  miles,  the  conditions  will  vary.  It  may  be  that  we 
wdU  need  60  feet,  a  60-foot  storage  car  over  a  part  of  it — — 

Question.  Yes;  let  us  leave  the  storage  car  out  for  a 
minute  in  order  to  keep  it  simple. 

Answer.  Yes;  well,  I  was  just  stating  that  to  show  the 
fluctuation  of  the  mail. 

Question.  Yes. 

Answer.  But,  at  any  rate,  a  60-foot  car  might  be  used 
to  its  capacity  on  a  run  of  that  length  over  one  part  of  the 
line  and  be  entirely  unnecessary  over  another  part  of  the 
run  of  that  car.  The  run  of  that  car  is  a  matter  that  is 
left  to  the  railway  company.  At  least,  we  do  not  object 
to  it.  It  is  an  economical  measure,  and  one  to  which  we 
can  conform  in  the  operation  of  our  service.     (R.  181-183). 

CLOSED  POUCH  AND  STORAGE  SPACE. 

ENTIRELY  PRACTICABLE  TO  HANDLE  CLOSED  POUCH 
MAILS  IN  THE  UNITS  AUTHORIZED  BY  THE  DEPART- 
MENT. 

Mr.  Bra  ITER  testified  on  direct  examination  as  follows: 
Question  (by  Mr.  Stewart)  .  You  have  lieard  the  testi- 
mon}^  of  railroad  witnesses  with  respect  to  the  handling  of 


133 

closed-pouch  mail,  for  instance,  in  small  units  in  baggage 
cars.  Do  you  think  that  it  is  entirely  practicable  to  handle 
them  in  connection  with  authorizations  such  as  are  made 
by  the  department  ? 

x\jiswer.  Three  and  seven  feet  ? 

Question.  Yes. 

Answer.  Yes,  sir;  without  the  necessity  of  separating 
on  the  car  floor — is  that  what  you  refer  to,  Mr.  Stewart? 

Question.  Well,  I  believe  the  railroad  witnesses  have 
testified  that,  as  a  matter  of  fact,  they  do  separate  them  on 
the  floor.  I  am  directing  your  attention  particularly 
to  the  practicability  of  stating  the  space  required  in  the 
units  designated  by  the  department,  and  I  ask  you  whether 
it  is  practicable  to  so  estimate  that  space  and  yet  handle 
the  mails  in  the  manner  the  railroads  say  it  is  most  con- 
venient to  handle  them;  for  instance,  take  a  3-foot  closed- 
pouch  unit.  How  do  the  railroad  employees  find  it  con- 
venient to  handle  that  ? 

Answer.  Well,  it  has  been  my  observation  that  they 
handle  it  in  connection  with  their  baggage  and  express; 
that  is,  they  will  sort  the  three  different  commodities — 
mail,  baggage,  and  express — together.  The  mail  is  piled 
on  top  of  the  baggage  and  express,  as  was  testified.  No 
doubt  that  is  the  best  way  to  do  it,  but  it  could  be 
handled,  and,  so  far  as  I  am  personally  concerned,  I  would 
much  prefer  if  the  3-foot  or  the  7-foot  was  stalled  off  in 
the  baggage  car  and  the  mails  piled  in  there  without  count. 
It  has  been  said  that  that  could  not  be  accomplished 
because  of  the  necessary  separation.  That  has  not  been 
my  actual  experience.  For  10  years,  I  ran  on  the  Santa  Fe 
between  Chicago  and  Kansas  City,  and  out  of  Chicago  we 
received  a  considerable  amount  of  local  mail  for  delivery 
at  all  the  stations  en  route.  Mr.  Lindsay,  perhaps,  knows 
exactly  the  number  between  Chicago  and  Kansas  City — I  do 
not  know — probably  40.  Of  course,  if  we  had  sorted  that 
out  on  the  floor,  we  would  never  have  had  any  room  to 
do  anything  else,  and  we  did  pile  it  in  one  or  "two  stalls, 
and  got  it  out  of  there  and  tendered  it  at  local  stations. 
There  was  no  inconvenience,  and  it  was  practicable.  They 
are  doing  it  to-day  in  just  that  same  way. 

Question.  Now,  you  are  speaking  of  the  work  in  a 
railway  post-office  car  ? 

Answer.  That  corresponds  to  the  work  in  a  baggage  car. 
These  sacks  are  made  up  for  direct  delivery  at  these  local 
stations,  and  there  is  no  difference  in  the  work.  So  far  as 
this  local  mail  is  concerned,  it  is  all  made  up  in  a  mail  car 
and  in  a  baggage  car. 

Question.  The  space  in  the  mail  car  is  somewhat  re- 
stricted, is  it  not  ? 


134 

Answer.  Storage  space  ? 

Question.  Storage  space. 

Answer.  Yes,  sir. 

Question.  And  under  those  circumstances  the  railway- 
postal  clerks  find  it  entirely  practicable  to  pile  this  mail 
m  the  storage  space  in  such  a  manner  that  the  mail  that  is 
received  and  the  mail  that  is  dispatched  may  be  handled 
without  any  inconvenience  ? 

Answer.  They  do  do  it. 

Question,  And  you  say  that  is  entirely  analogous  with 
the  service,  in  so  far  as  the  unloading  of  the  mails  from  the 
car  is  concerned,  which  is  performed  in  the  baggage  cars  ? 

Answer.  Yes;  the  small  units,  you  are  speaking  of? 

Question.  Yes;  I  am  speaking^ of  the  small  units. 

Answer.  Three  and  seven.     (R.  2931-2933.) 

STORAGE  SPACE  AUTHORIZATIONS  GENERALLY  CAR- 
RIED IN  EXCESS  SPACE  IN  OVERSIZE  CARS  WHEN 
SUCH  CARS  ARE  OPERATED. 

Mr.  Knox  on  cross-examination  testified  as  follows: 

Question  (by  Mr.  Wood).  I  think  you  said  yesterday 
that  in  a  large  proportion  of  cases  where  cars  larger,  or 
apartments  larger,  than  the  authorized  apartments  are 
actually  operated  they  are  accompanied  by  a  regular  stor- 
age authorization,  and  that  the  storage  mail  is  carried  in 
the  oversize  car. 

Answer.  Yes;  they  are  accompanied  by  regular  storage 
authorizations  one  way. 

Question.  Yes,  and  that  is  carried  in  the  oversize  car? 

Answer.  With  the  exception  of  the  Union  Pacific  Lines, 
it  is  generally  carried  in  the  oversize  car.  The  Union 
Pacific  system  has  requested  that  this  mail  be  carried  in 
the  regular  baggage  car,  except  in  any  particular  instance 
where  they  request  us  to  put  it  in  the  oversize  car. 

Question,  But  there  are  a  great  many  cases  of  the  over- 
size car  with  the  storage  authorization  one  way  in  your 
division,  with  the  storage  carried  m  the  oversize  car,  are 
there  not  ? 

Answer,  There  are  many  cases,  I  could  not  give  you 
the  percentage  of  them  as  compared  with  the  total. 

Question,  I  would  just  as  soon  strike  out  the  adjective 
and  say  there  were  many. 

Answer,  I  could  run  through  the  schedule  and  give  you 
the  exact  number,  but  there  are  a  large  number  of  them. 

Question,  No;  that  won't  be  necessary,  "WHiat  is  true 
in  your  division  is  true  of  other  divisions  ? 

Answer,  I  should  think  so.     (R.  3091,  3092.) 


135 

WHEN  DEPARTMENT  AUTHORIZES  MAILS  TO  BE  CAR- 
RIED IN  EXCESS  SPACE,  IT  PAYS  FOR  THE  UNITS  IN 
THAT  SPACE. 

Mr.  Stewart  stated  during  the  direct  testimony  of  Mi-. 
Mack,  in  reply  to  inquiry  of  Attorney  Examiner  Brown, 
as  follows : 

Question  (by  Attorney  Examiner  Brown).  Well,  now, 
take  your  next  section,  the  fifteenth  rule  or  fifteenth  para- 
graph of  the  statute: 

Where  authorizations  are  made  for  cars  of  the  standard  makes  of  60, 
30.  and  15  feet,  as  provided  by  this  section,  and  the  raih-oad  company 
is  unable  to  furnish  such  cars  oit  the  length  authorized,  but  furnislies  cars 
of  lesser  length  than  those  authorized,  but  which  are  determined  by  the 
department  to  be  sufficient  for  the  service,  the  Postmaster  General  may 
accept  the  same  and  pay  only  for  the  actual  space  furnished  and  used, 
the  compensation  to  be  njt  exceeding  pro  rata  of  that  provided  by  this 
section  for  the  standard  length  so  autharized:  Provided.  That  the  Post- 
master General  may  accept  cars  and  apartments  of  greater  length  than 
those  of  the  standard  requested,  but  no  compensation  shall  be  allowed 
for  such  excess  lengths. 

It  would  appear  that  the  rules  the  department  is  oper- 
ating upon  do  come  from  the  statute,  but,  of  com-se,  you 
are  now  proffering  testimony  as  to  the  inequality  and  in- 
justice of  the  statute  and  the  rules  of  the  department  also. 

^Ii".  Stewart.  I  will  sa}^,  Mr.  Exammer,  right  there,  in 
regard  to  that  last  proviso,  that  where  there  is  excess  space 
there  and  the  department  requires  other  units  of  service 
and  it  can  be  carried  therein,  it  does  pay  for  the  units  in 
that  space.     (.R.  1909,  1910.) 

APARTMENT-CAR  SERVICE  SUPERSEDED  BY  CLOSED- 
POUCH  SERVICE  ONLY  AFTER  THOROUGH  INVESTI- 
GATION AND  COMPLETE  ARRANGEMENTSTO  PROVIDE 
MAIL  SERVICE;  SUCH  CHANGES  NOT  TO  THE  DETRI- 
MENT OF  THE  SERVICE. 

Mr.  Gaixes  testified  on  direct  exa?:nination,  as  follows: 

Question  (by  Mr.  Stewart).  Mr.  Gaines,  Mr.  MacK:  re- 
ferred to  the  case  of  the  Bridgeport  and  Graham  railway 
post  office  and  the  Amarillo  and  Tucumcari  railway  post 
office. 

***** 

which  were  discontmued  and  closed-pouch  service  substi- 
tuted.    Wliat  have  you  to  say  in  regard  to  those  cases? 

Aiisw(u-.  I  can  only  say,  like  all  cases  where  those  15- 
foot  apartment  car  lines  were  discontinued  and  the  closed- 
pouch  service  substituted  for  the  railway  post-office  service, 
it  was  done,  after  very  thorough  investigation  and  arrange- 
ments made  to  take  care  of  the  service,  so  that  there  would 


136 

he  no  (l(>lav  to  any  mail,  oxcopt  that  possibly  people  living 
along  the  line  of  the  road  would  not  be  a])le  to  dis])ateh 
mail  at  the  last  moment  ])y  giving  it  to  a  postal  elerk  in 
the  train.  On  the  Britlgeport  and  Graham,  I  b(4ieve, 
there  are  only  three  ofhees  on  the  line,  and  if  I  had  any 
excuse  to  offer  it  would  be  for  reeommenduig  the  service 
on  that  part  of  the  line  to  start  wdth. 

Question.  That  is  the  apartment-car  service? 

Answer.  The  apartment-car  service.  You  spoke  of  an- 
other case,  the  Amarillo  and  Tucumcari.  The  same  an- 
swer will  apply  to  that,  although  I  do  not  know  just  how 
many  local  ofRces  intervene,  but  I  will  say  that  in  any  case 
where  it  can  be  shown  that  the  service  is  suffering,  and 
any  mail  being  delayed  by  the  arrangement,  a  recom- 
mendation will  be  made  for  the  reestablishment  of  the 
railway  post  office.  We  do  not  intend  to  make  those 
changes  to  the  detriment  of  the  service,  and  I  believe  they 
have  not  been  so  made.     (R.  3280,  3281.) 

PRACTICE  OF  DISCONTINUING  APARTMENT  CARS  AND 
SUBSTITUTING  CLOSED-POUCH  SPACE  NOT  PECULIAR 
TO  THE  SPACE  BASIS. 

Mr.  Knox  testified  on  re-direct  examination  as  follows : 

Question  (by  Mr.  Stewart)  .  Reference  was  made  to 
the  discontinuance  of  apartment-car  service  and  the  sub- 
stitution of  closed-pouch  authorization.  Was  it  the  prac- 
tice under  the  old  system  to  do  that  from  time  to  time  ? 

Answer.  As  conditions  changed  on  any  route  they  w^ere 
occasionally  discontinued.     It  was  not  extensive,  though. 

Question.  And  the  practice  of  discontinuing  apartment 
cars  under  the  present  system  and  substituting  closed- 
pouch  service  therefor  is  not  essentially  or  especially  a 
product  of  the  space  system  ? 

A.  Not  necessarily  so.     (R.  3190,  3191.) 

COMBINATION  OF  UNITS  IN  AUTHORIZING  STORAGE 
'SPACE  IN  REGULAR  SERVICE  NOT  A  DESIRABLE 
MODIFICATION  OF  SYSTEM. 

Mr.  Knox  testified  on  cross-examination  as  follows : 

Question  (b;y  Mr.  Wood).  Mr.  Knox,  some  time  earlier 
in  the  case  a  witness  was  produced  by  Mr.  Stewart  with  the 
preliminary  statement  that  the  department  had  certain 
proposals  to  make  with  respect  to  an  amendment  of  the 
space  unit.  That  witness  proceeded  to  read  the  proposals 
of  the  department,  which  contemplated,  as  I  understood 
the  witness,  the  elimination,  so  far  as  storage  space  is  con- 
cerned, of  what  the  witness  called  the  step  plan  from  3  to 
7,  7  to  15,  15  to  30,  and  30  to  60  in  connection  with  the 


187 

regular  storage  authorization,  and  the  substitution  of  stor- 
age space  to  be  authorized  without  regard  to  the  step  plan, 
but  by  a  combination  of  lesser  units.  In  your  opinion, 
would  that  be  a  desirable  modification  of  the  space  system  ? 
Answer.  Not  from  the  standpoint  of  the  man  in  the  field, 
I  don't  think  it  would.     (R.  3170.) 

EMERGENCY  SPACE. 

EMERGENCY    AUTHORIZATIONS    AND     PAYMENTS    DE- 
SCRIBED. 

Mr.  Kxox  testified  on  direct  examination  as  follows : 

Answer.  The  emergency  authorizations  are  of  a  radically 
different  natm^e  than  regular  authorizations.  They  are 
designed  to  meet  emergencies,  as  the  name  implies,  and  they 
may  be  made  for  all  units  of  space,  either  single  or  in  com- 
bination, to  and  including  the  full  storage  car.  Dis- 
tributing cars  or  apartments  are  not  authorized  as  emer- 
gency units  except  in  rare  instances,  such  as  when  service 
is  interrupted  and  standard  distributing  cars  are  available. 
In  such  instances  emergency  authorization  may  be  used  to 
cover  any  distributing  apartment  that  may  be  available. 

Question  (by  Mr.  Stewart).  Now,  do  tliose  instances 
occur  very  often  ? 

Answer.  Very  rarely,  indeed — perhaps  once  or  twice  a 
year  in  the  whole  division. 

Question.  So  that,  as  a  matter  of  fact,  the  emergency 
service  is  that  service  which  is  concerned  almost  entirely 
with  the  flow  of  mails  in  closed-pouch  and  storage  units  ? 

Answer.  Yes,  sir.  Emergency  authorizations  are  made 
by  transfer  clerks  and  by  railway  postal  clerks,  and  these 
clerks  in  making  requests  for  emergency  space  make  same 
in  accordance  with  certain  rules  issued  by  the  department. 
The  department  is  bound  by  these  authorizations  and  wiU 
make  payment  for  services  as  shown  performed  upon  affi- 
davit covering  the  same  being  presented  by  the  railroad 
companies.  These  affidavits  are  similar  in  form  to  those 
used  in  reporting  regular  service,  and  pass  through  the 
division  superintendent's  office,  certificates  being  there  at- 
tached in  the  usual  manner.  Similar  action  as  has  been  re- 
lated in  regard  to  regular  units  of  service  is  taken  in  relation 
to  exceptions,  etc.  In  the  event  emergency  service  is 
necessary  on  a  train  where  there  is  no  department  repre- 
sentative available  to  furnish  the  emergency  authoriza- 
tion, the  department  accepts  requisition  for  such  space 
signed  by  railroad  baggagemen  or  other  railroad  repre- 
sentatives; that  is,  provided  this  train  is  authorized  to 
carry  space.     All  emergency  authorizations  accompany  the 


188 

affidavit,  that  is,  these  small  authorizations,  prepared  by 
the  companies  in  the  division  superintendent's  office  before 
forwardino;  to  the  department. 

Question.  Now,  the  purpose  of  making  these  emergency 
authorizations  is  to  provide  a  means  of  paying  accurately 
for  the  service  that  is  performed;  is  that  correct? 

Answer.  That  is  correct;  yes. 

Question.  Will  you  describe  a  little  more  in  detail, 
takmg  one  instance,  the  manner  in  which  it  is  done? 
Assumino;,  now,  that  you  have  a  regular  authorization,  and 
that  you  nave  an  increase  in  service  which  must  be  provided 
for  by  emergency  authorization,  how  does  the  matter 
come  up,  and  how  is  it  handled  ? 

Answer.  Well,  assume  that  there  is  a  15-foot  storage  unit 
in  a  train  authorized  for  service,  and  that  if  the  train  leaves 
the  initial  terminal  or  proceeds  over  the  route  from  day  to 
day,  it  is  necessary  for  the  postal  clerk  in  that  train,  at 
the  transfer  point  or  at  the  initial  point,  to  issue  to  the 
railroad  company  a  request  for  emergency  space  practically 
20  days  or  more  in  a  month.  These  emergency  affidavits 
come  to  my  office  direct:  that  is,  through  the  chief  clerk, 
the  original.  The  duplicate  is  sent  to  the  railroad  com- 
pany. By  the  end  of  the  month  the  clerk  in  charge  of  that 
service  in  my  office  has  called  my  attention  to  the  fact 
that  the  emergency  service  in  this  train  is  running  heavy; 
that  there  are  20,  24,  or  25  days  during  the  month  when 
it  is  necessary  to  ask  the  company  to  furnish  additional 
space.  That  being  established,  a  report  is  submitted  by 
me  to  the  department  calling  these  facts  to  its  attention, 
with  the  request  that  the  15-foot  storage  unit  be  discon- 
tinued, and,  m  lieu  thereof,  a  30-foot  storage  unit  be  author- 
ized, unless  there  is  some  other  means  of  handling  this 
mail.  We  do  not  want  to  jump  from  15  to  30  if  we  can 
dispatch  the  mail  with  equal  advantage  elsewhere.  That 
is  looked  into,  of  course. 

Question.  Now,  no  emergency  mails  are  carried  in  the 
train  unless  the  train  will  furnish  the  facility  in  its  ordinary 
and  usual  consist  to  transport  it     *     *     *  ? 

Answer.  No.  If  mails  are  offered  a  train  en  route  or  at 
the  initial  terminal  at  such  time  that  there  is  no  room  for 
these  emergency  mails  in  the  train,  the  company  does  not 
have  to  carry  them;  the  mails  are  left  to  be  handled  by 
some  subsequent  train  or  dispatched  on  some  other  line. 

Question.  During  this  time  when  the  emergency  mail 
runs  on  an  average,  say,  20  days  in  the  month,  the  railroad 
is  receiving  full  pay  for  that  service,  is  it  not,  although  the 
authorization  has  not  yet  been  made  permanent  ? 

Answer.  They  are  receiving  full  pay  for  all  mails  carried; 
yes,  sir.     (R.  3027-3030.) 


139 
THE    AUTHORIZATION   OF   EMERGENCY    SPACE    UNITS. 

Mr.  Stone  testified  on  cross-examination  as  follows : 

Question  (by  Mr.  Wood).  Now,  taking  these  administra- 
tive features  in  the  field,  *  *  *  who  determmes  the 
space  authorizations  ? 

*  *  *  *  * 

Answer.  I  think,  if  there  is  a  transfer  clerk  at  the  station, 
and  he  had  more  mail  to  put  on  than  could  be  accommo- 
dated in  the  regular  authorizations,  he  would  make  out  a 
request  to  the  local  representative  for  the  additional  emer- 
geJcv  space  that  he  needed.  If  there  was  no  transfer 
clerk,  and  there  was  a  clerk  in  charge  of  the  tram,  he  would 
perform  that  duty.  ^  ,  n   -.  ^ 

Question.  Is  there  any  regular  or  definite  course  set 
do^\^l  for  your  transfer  clerks  to  follow  m  authorizing  that 
emergency  space ?  .  ,     ^^        ,       •.      £ 

Answer.  Yes;  they  are  furnished  wnth  different  units  ot 
space  that  they  can  require,  and  for  the  smaller  units  they 
are  mstructed  that  a  certain  number  of  sacks  should  be 
accepted  as  equivalent  to  1  linear  foot  of  space  m  a  baggage 
car. 

Question.  Now,  on  a  train  that  is  about  to  depart  you 
find  that  the  regular  mail  authorization  on  that  trani  is 
not  sufficient  to  accommodate  the  mail  offered,  what 
happens  ?  Does  the  transfer  clerk  then  count  up  the  num- 
ber of  bags  that  there  is  left  over? 

Answer.  He  would  probably  form  his  conclusions  betore 
the  train  arrived,  according  to  the  mail  that  was  on  hand. 
He  would  know  what  the  authorized  space  was  on  that 
train,  and  he  would  make  his  request  for  the  excess,  or 
what  was  needed.  . 

Question.  All  of  that  takes  time,  does  it  not  i 

Answer.  It  takes  some  time.  i    •   •  . 

Question.  That  is  a  regular  feature  of  the  administra- 
tive work  under  the  space  basis  that  you  did  not  have 
under  the  w^eight  basis  ?  ,14.1. 

Answ^er.  But  the  transfer  clerk  was  there  under  tne 
weight  basis,  anjrway. 

Question.  I  understand  he  was  there,  but  there  was  not 
the  necessity  for  those  formal  authorizations.  How  does 
he  make  that?  1  •  ,     ,  i 

Answer.  There  is  a  small  blank  on  which  he  makes 
request  for  so  many  feet  of  additional  space. 

Question.  Whom  does  he  make  that  rcouest  on  ? 

Answer.  To  the  local  representative  of  the  railroad  com- 
pany.    (R.  382-384.) 


140 

Mr.  CoRRiDON  testified  on  cross-examination  regarding 
emergency  authorizations,  as  follows: 

Question  (by  Attorney  Examiner  Brown).  What  Mr. 
Wood  is  drivmg  at  is,  when  this  ticket  is  made  out  author- 
izing the  cai'rier  to  use  what  is  called  emergency  space,  and 
that  gets  dowm  here  to  Washington,  does  anybody  raise 
any  objections  to  it  here? 

Answ^er.  No;  they  do  not,  as  a  rule,  unless  there  is  some- 
thing exceptional,  for  the  reason  that  the  railroad's  state- 
ment is  made  in  the  form  of  an  affidavit  and  is  vised  by  the 
division  superintendent  before  it  comes  to  the  department. 
(R.  416.) 

He  also  testified  as  follows : 

The  standard  apartment  cars  are,  as  you  know,  15  and  30 
feet.  There  are  perhaps  4,500  apartment  cars.  We  wall 
assume  that  40  per  cent  of  those  4,500  cars  are  not  standard. 
They  are  either  above  or  below  in  linear  feet  the  authorized 
space.  Were  all  cars  standard,  the  question  of  emergency 
would  not  arise,  only  outside  of  the  authorized  unit.  There 
is  a  wall  in  the  car,  15  feet  of  space,  and  if  there  is  an  emer- 
gency asked  for  in  a  case  of  that  kind,  it  is  an  emergency 
proposition  in  the  adjoining  part  of  the  car,  in  the  baggage 
car.  Now,  with  oversized  cars,  we  have  had  an  expert 
go  into  the  field  to  determine  the  amount  of  storage  space 
normally  in  those  cars.  He  says  that  in  a  15-foot  car  there 
is  space  for  46  sacks — these  are  standard  oars — and  in  a 
30-foot  car  authorization  there  is  space  for  129  sacks,  and 
in  60  feet,  240  sacks.  That  is  the  basis  for  the  emergency 
authorizations  in  oversized  cars.  For  example,  a  company, 
instead  of  furnishing  a  15-foot  apartment  authorization, 
*  *  *  asked  for,  *  *  *  furnishes  a  20-foot  car.  There 
is  no  space  walling  off  the  excess  5  feet.  We  need  emergency 
space  in  that  car.  It  is  necessary  to  count  46  sacks  to 
complete  a  regular  authorization,  and  then  any  additional 
sacks  are  authorized  on  the  basis  of  15  sacks  to  the  linear 
foot.  When  the  clerk  sees  that  his  car  has  46  sacks,  and 
there  is  more  mail  on  the  siding  to  put  into  that  car,  there 
is  an  authorization  for  the  equivalent  space,  based  on  the 
exclusion  of  the  46  sacks  and  the  inclusion  of  the  surplus. 

Question  (by  Mr.  Wood).  That  is  quite  irrespective  of 
whether,  as  a  matter  of  fact,  at  that  particular  time,  46 
sacks  W'ill  go  into  the  regular  space  or  not;  it  may  be  that 
the  regular  space  will  be  taken  up  with  30  sacks  or  35  or 
40  sacks,  but,  irrespective  of  the  amount  of  space  actually 
occupied,  the  emergency  only  begins  after  46  sacks  have 
been  carried  somewhere  in  the  train  ? 

Answer.  Yes,  sir;  that  is  correct.     (R.  417,  418.) 


141 

He  also  testified  as  follows : 

Question  (by  Dr.  Lorenz).  Do  I  understand  that  the 
railroads  do  not  accept  your  rule  regarding  the  counting  of 
sacks  as  a  fair  rule  of  universal  application  ?  Is  that  the 
source  of  the  controversy  ? 

Answer.  I  think  it  is. 

Question.  Now,  if  you  took  all  of  these  protests  together 
that  are  still  outstanding,  we  will  say,  against  the  business 
of  the  year  ending  June  30,  1918,  how  much  extra  would  it 
amount  to,  as  compared  to  the  total  year's  compensation  ? 
Would  it  be  5  or  10  per  cent  ? 

Answer.  Of  the  entire  compensation  ? 

Question.  Yes. 

Answer.  Oh,  no;  nothing  like  it.  Do  you  mean  of  the 
entire  railway  mail  compensation? 

Question.   Yes. 

Answer.  Nothing  like  it. 

Question.  You  do  not  know  what  amount  it  would  be  ? 

Answer.  I  can  give  you  the  estimate  of  the  actual 
emergency  service  as  proportioned  to  the  entire  pay. 

Attorney  Examiner  Brown.  No;  that  is  not  the  ques- 
tion. 

Question  (by  Dr.  Lorenz).  I  mean  what  was  the  value, 
in  dollars,  of  these  protests  ? 

Answer.  I  would  say  inconsiderable.     (R.  422,  423.) 

WHERE  EMERGENCY  MAILS  MUST  BE  DISPATCHED  AND 
THERE  IS  NO  ROOM  IN  THE  CONSIST  OF  THE  TRAIN, 
A  FULL  CAR  IS  ORDERED  AND  PAID  FOR. 

Mr.  Brauer  testified  on  cross-examination  as  follows: 

Answer.  *  *  *  You  have  a  solid  mail  train  and  there 
is  no  space  in  it,  if  they  have  got  3  feet  of  mail  to  transport, 
and  they  want  it  to  go,  it  takes  a  full  car  and  it  is  paid  for. 

Question  (by  Mr.  Wood).  Well,  you  don't  often  do  that, 
do  you  'i 

Answer.  I  have  done  it.  I  don't  suppose  for  3  feet,  but  I 
have  done  it  for  15  feet  many  times.     (R.  3442.) 

SUBSTITUTION  OF  REGULAR  FOR  EMERGENCY  AUTHORI- 
ZATION WHEN  LATTER  IS  NEEDED  TWENTY  OR  MORE 
TIMES  A  MONTH. 

Mr.  Knox  testified  on  cross-examination  as  follows: 

Question  (by  Mr.  Wood).  Did  I  understand  you  to  say 
that  the  rule  of  the  department  was  that  regular  author- 
izations would  he  substituted  for  emergency  authorizations 
where  the  emergency  authorizations  exceeded  20  days  a 
month  ? 


U-2 

Answer.  The  department  will  authorize  regular  space  if 
report  is  made  by  division  superintendent  caUing  attention 
to  the  fact  that  emergency  autliorizations  exceed  twenty  or 
more  times  in  a  month  on  various  days  on  any  particular 
train. 

Question.  But  do  they  always  authorize  it  when  such  a 
showing  is  reported? 

Answer.  I  have  never  had  any  case  of  my  personal  knowl- 
edge that  they  have  not. 

Question.  Do  I  understand  it  to  be  a  rule  of  the  depart- 
ment that  regular  storage  authorizations  will  be  substi- 
tuted for  emergency  autliorizations  where  the  emergency 
authorizations  continue  for  20  days  in  the  month  ? 

Answer.  It  is  the  practice  of  the  department  if  the  rec- 
ommendation is  made  by  division  superintendents. 

Question.  How  many  months  does  that  have  to  con- 
tinue ? 

Answer.  The  change  will  be  made  if  the  statement  is 
made  by  the  superintendent  showing  that  the  emergency 
space  in  the  train  in  question  exceeds  those  days  in  one 
month. 

Question.  Twenty  days  ? 

Answer.  Twenty  or  more. 

***** 

Question  (by  Mr.  Wood).  If  it  was  19  days,  no  matter 
how  her.vy  on  those  19,  then  there  would  not  be  any 
recommendation  ? 

Answer.  1  would  probably  wait  until  the  next  month  to 
see  liow  it  got  along.  Meanwhile  the  company  is  getting 
paid  for  this  emergency  service  in  the  exact  amount  car- 
ried.    (R.  3165,  3166,  3170-3173.) 

ADVANTAGES    TO    DEPARTMENT    AND    RAILROADS    IN 
PLACING  EMERGENCY  SERVICE  ON  REGULAR  BASIS. 

Mr.  Knox  testified  on  re-direct  exammation  as  foUows: 

Question  (by  Mr.  Stewart),  Mr.  Knox,  in  that  enumera- 
tion which  Mr.  Wood  made;  that  is,  from  the  record  of 
the  service  which  was  performed  by  the  company  during 
that  period  with  respect  to  the  excess  mail  over  regular 
authorizations?  Is  not  that  true?  That  is  the  record  of 
service  performed  ? 

Answer.  That  is  the  record  of  the  service  made  upon 
our  affidavit  and  submitted  to  my  office. 

Question.  And  the  company  was  paid  for  that  service 
u])on  that  record  ? 


•143 

Answer.  The  affidavit  here  shows  that  the  department 
made  payment  upon  that  statement  of  service  performed. 

Question.  And  with  respect  to  the  question  of  authori- 
zation of  regular  service  following  a  condition  like  that,  it 
simply  amounts  to  this,  does  it  not,  that  the  payment  for 
the  service,  if  made  upon  a  regular  authorization,  proceeds 
upon  that  basis  thereafter  instead  of  upon  this  emergency 
basis  ? 

.Answer.  That  is  the  import  of  the  change.  It  reduces 
the  work  on  both  the  part  of  the  railroads  and  the  postal 
clerks  and  division  superintendents"  offices,  and  all  con- 
cerned, by  getting  it  to  a  regular  basis  instead  of  paying 
for  these  units  of  which  each  one  has  to  be  treated  sep- 
arately. 

Question.  And  that  is  the  advantage  to  be  derived  by 
placmg  it  on  the  regular  authorization  basis  ? 

Answer.  Otherwise  we  would  continue  it  as  an  emer- 
genc}'  authorization  indefinitely. 

Question.  You  think  it  should  go  on  the  regular  basis  as 
soon  as  practicable  ? 

Answer.  Oh,  certainly. 

Question.  And  that  is  the  purpose  of  your  administra- 
tion of  vour  service  in  your  division  ? 

Answer.  It  is.     (R.  3188,  3189.) 

PERCENTAGE    OF   EMERGENCY    SPACE   TO   ENTIRE   AU- 
THORIZED SPACE. 

]Mi-.  Kxox  testified  on  direct  examination  as  foUows: 

Answer.  Authorizations  for  service  under  the  space  basis 
plan  of  payment  are  of  two  classes — regular  and  emer- 
gency. Of  these  two  classes  practically  all  existing  service 
is  handled  under  regular  authorizations;  2.81  per  cent  of 
the  mails  handled  are  covered  by  emergency  authoriza- 
tions, of  which  latter  authorizations  those  for  full  storage 
cars  comprise  about  half.  These  cars,  though  used  as  a 
rule  one  way,  are  paid  for  by  the  department  as  a  round- 
trip  movement. 

Question  (by  Mr.  Stewaet).  Now,  Mr.  Knox,  right  there, 
as  I  understand, your  statement  of  the  testimony  in  this  case 
with  reference  to  the  emergency  authorizations  applies  to 
but  2.81  per  cent  of  the  service,  and  at  least  one-haLf  of 
that  is  carried  in  fuU  storage  cars,  and  does  not  fall  under 
the  criticism  which  has  been  leveled  against  it;  is  that 
correct  ? 

Answer.  That  is  my  understanding;  yes,  sn.     (R.3017.) 


144 

RULE  FOR  COMBINING  UNITS  OF  SPACE  IN  EMERGENCY 
SERVICE  DOES  NOT  APPLY  TO  REGULAR  SERVICE. 

Mr.  Stewart  made  the  following  statement: 

I  want  to  call  further  attention  to  the  fact  that  this  rule 
ahout  wliich  so  much  has  heen  said  does  not  apply  to  any 
regular  authorization.  It  only  applies  to  what  the  depart- 
ment has  called  emergency  autliorizations,  and  the  pur- 
pose of  these  emergency  authorizations  is  to  supply  some 
sort  of  measure  of  service,  and  pay  for  it,  for  an  element 
which  seems  not  to  have  heen  ])rovided  for  in  tiie  statute. 
The  statute  provides  for  regular  units  of  authorization. 
It  seems  to  me  that  in  the  actual  operation  of  the  service 
there  is  a  certam  fluctuation,  one  way  and  another,  gener- 
ally an  increase  in  mail  over  the  regular  authorizations. 
Some  device  had  to  be  provided  for  pajdng  for  that  service, 
of  authorizing  it  first,  and  paying  for  it,  and  that  is  the 
device  which  was  used  here.  Now,  hear  in  mind  that 
those  authorizations  are  never  made  unless  tlie  space  is 
found  in  the  consist  of  the  train.  Nothing  extra  is  ever 
asked  of  the  railroad  company  on  that.     (E.  2071.) 

THE  DISTINCTION  BETWEEN  REGULAR  AND  EMERGENCY 
SERVICE  LIES  IN  THE  FACT  THAT  THE  LATTER  IS 
EXPECTED  TO  BE  FURNISHED  ONLY  WHEN  THERE  IS 
SPACE  AVAILABLE  IN  REGULAR  CONSIST  OF  TRAIN 
AND  THE  AUTHORIZATION  IS  TERMINATED  WHEN 
THE  NEED  FOR  THE  SPACE  CEASES,  THE  VACATED 
SPACE  BEING  THEN  AVAILABLE  FOR  COMPANY 
PURPOSES. 

During  Mr.  Mack's  direct  testimony,  in  a  discussion  of 
emergency  service,  Mr.  Stewart  stated  the  distinctions  be- 
tween regular  and  emergency  service  as  follows : 

Mr.  Stewart.  *  *  *  May  I  suggest  some  other 
features  that  appear  to  have  been  overlooked  ? 

It  appears  to  me  that  the  very  basis  of  this  lies  in  the 
distinction  between  the  regular  service  and  the  emergency 
service,  so  far  as  the  consist  of  the  train  is  concerned. 
Mr.  Mack  has  said  that  the  regular  service  is  authorized 
for  these  regular  units,  and  in  connection  vnih  that  we  all 
admit — Mr.  Mack  will  admit  to  me,  or  I  will  admit  to  him, 
rather— that  the  company  must  provide  that  unit  if  it  is 
a  reasonable  requirement  of  the  department.  Now,  when 
we  come  to  the  emergency  service  there  is  this  radical 
distinction  between  that  and  the  regular  service,  and  from 
that  distinction,  as  I  understand,  arises  this  rule,  which 
applies  to  different  kinds  of  combinations  of  these  units. 


145 

I  {1111  stilting  no  moro  at  this  timo  than  simply  to  point  out 
the  reasons  for  the  distinction. 

After  reciting  the  table  here,  the  reguhition  or  the  rule 
proceeds : 

It  is  to  be  understood  in  this  connection  that  the  carriers  are  expected 
to  furnish  these  emergency  units  only  in  the  space  which  may  be  avail- 
able in  the  regular  consist  of  the  train. 

I  call  attention  to  that. 

The  WiTXESs.  Yes,  sir;  that  is  like  the  first  iUustration 
I  had. 

Mr.  Stewart.  It  will  be  requested,  and  need  only  be 
furnished  if  the  company  has  this  space  available  in  the 
consist  of  the  train. 

Now,  attention  has  been  called  to  the  fact  that  these 
authorizations  diminish  from  point  to  point  along  the  line,, 
and  considerable  comment  has  been  made  upon  the  fact 
that  thereby  certain  space  has  been  released  to  the  com- 
panies, and' it  has  been  stated  or  inferred  from  the  dis- 
cussion that  that  space  is  not  available  for  any  use  the 
company  put  it  to;  but  bear  in  mind  the  department  is 
not  responsible  for  that.  That  space  is  already  in  the  train, 
would  have  been  run  whether  any  emergency  authorizatioii 
had  been  made  at  all  or  not,  and  the  idea,  as  I  take  it,  of 
tliis  seemingly  peculiar  manner  of  authorizing  the  emer- 
gency space  is  only  to  charge  the  department  with  the 
actual  space  required  where  it  does  no  harm  to  the  rail- 
road company.  They  say  it  releases  space  that  they  can 
not  use.  The  department  says  that  it  releases  space  that, 
they  would  run  anjdiow,  whether  we  have  an  emergency 
authorization  in  that  train  or  not. 

Now,  passing  on  to  another  point,  in  the  next  sentence; 

Where  the  amount  of  emergency  mail  re  juires  more  than  30  feet  of 
space  aad  the  company  does  not  have  available  sufficient  space  in  the 
train  to  accommodate  "it.  reiuests  may  be  made  of  the  carrier  for  an 
additional  storage  car.  if  in  the  opinion  of  the  department's  representa- 
tive the  importance  of  the  mail  or  otlier  conditions  warrant  the  expendi- 
ture, and  when  furnished  ^vill  be  paid  for  at  full  rates. 

So  that,  in  practical  operation,  if  these  units  are  not 
found  in  the  consist  of  the  train  above  30  feet  of  space, 
they  are  not  requested.  The  request  is  for  a  full  car,  and 
if  the  company  furnishes  it,  they  get  full  pay  for  a  full  car. 

rethink  in  "the  discussion  of  tliis  matter,  in  regard  to 
which  so  much  has  been  attempted  to  be  made,  these  facts 
ought  to  be  clearly  apparent  in  the  record.    (R.  1872-1875.) 

122G98— 19 10 


146 

UNDER  THE  SPACE  BASIS  RAILROADS  ARE  REQUIRED 
TO  PROVIDE  SPACE  FOR  THE  REGULAR  AUTHORI- 
ZATIONS. BUT  SPACE  FOR  EMERGENCY  AUTHORI- 
ZATIONS LESS  THAN  FULL  CARS  IS  REQUIRED 
ONLY  WHEN  THEY  MAY  BE  ACCOMMODATED  IN  THE 
REGULAR  CONSIST  OF  THE  TRAIN. 

Mr.  Gaines  tostificd  on  direct  examination  as  follows: 

Question  (by  Mr.  Stewart)  .  Witnesses  for  the  railroads 
have  testified  variously  with  respect  to  the  alleged  necessity 
for  leaving  baggage  and  express  when  emergency  mail  was 
offered.  I  think  the  testimony  was  not  very  clear  at  times 
as  to  whether  it  was  meant  to  apply  to  emergency  mails 
or  to  the  regular  mails.  Will  you  please  state  what  the 
rules  are  with  respect  to  that;  or,  I  will  say,  state  what 
your  experience  is  w  ith  respect  to  that  practice  ? 

Answer.  The  rule  under  the  weight  basis  was  that  the 
railroad  companies  must  provide  space  for  mails  whether 
delayed  mails  or  not,  even  though  they  had  to  take  baggage 
and  ex])ress  out  of  the  cars  for  the  purpose  of  accommo- 
dating the  mails.  That  rule  has  been  changed,  and  under 
the  space  basis  they  are  only  required  to  provide  sj^ace 
for  the  regular  authorizations,  and  we  can  not  require  the 
company  to  handle  emergency  mails  if  there  is  no  space 
in  the  train  in  which  that  emergency  mail  can  be  placed 
upon  its  being  offered  to  the  company.     (R.  3235,  3236.) 

Mr.  Wood  read  the  rule  stated  in  paragraph  42,  page  48, 
of  Post  Office  Department  Exhibit  No.  1. 

Mr.  Gaines  continued:  I  said  that  under  the  weight 
basis  the  railroad  companies  could  be  required  to  unload 
baggage  and  express  after  it  had  already  been  loaded,  for 
the  accommodation  of  mails  offered  before  the  departure 
of  the  train.  Under  the  space  basis  that  is  not  true. 
They  are  only  required  to  provide  space  for  excess  mails 
when  there  is  space  available  in  the  consist  of  the  train 
at  the  time  that  mail  is  offered. 

***** 

Answer.  Oh,  if  thei'c  is  mail,  baggage,  and  express  on 
the  ])latform  at  the  same  time,  w^e  insist  that  the  mail 
shall  be  given  preference,  but  we  do  not  require,  as  we  did 
under  the  weight  basis,  that  baggage  and  express  be 
unloaded  from  baggage  cars  or  express  cars  and  the  mail 
loaded  in  its  stead.     That  is  the  difference. 

Question  (by  Mr.  Stewart).  Have  you  observed,  Mr. 
Gaines,  that  baggage  and  express  both  are,  in  fact,  left 
behind  under  those  circumstances ''. 


147 

Answer.  I  believe  no  case  has  come  under  my  personal 
knowledge  except  dm-ing  the  holiday  ])erio(l.  I  believe 
there  was  an  instance  where  baggage  and  ex])ress  and,  in 
fact,  during  the  holiday  period  it  is  possible  that  baggage 
and  express  was  left  on  certain  occasions.  I  know  of 
but  few.     (R.  3237-3239.) 

THE  SOLICITOR  FOR  THE  POST  OFFICE  DEPARTMENT 
HAS  RULED  THAT  MORE  THAN  ONE  UNIT  OF  SPACE 
MAY  BE  AUTHORIZED. 

During  Mr.  Mack's  direct  testimony,  the  question  of 
authorizing  more  than  one  unit  of  space  in  baggage  cars 
was  under  discussion  and  the  following  colloquy  ensued 
between  Attorney  Examiner  Brown  and  Mr.  Stewart. 

Attorney  Examiner  Browx.  I  suppose  the  Post  Office 
Department  will  justify  these  figures,  but  the  statute 
does  not  seem  to  provide  for  that  kind  of  a  division.  The 
statute  says  that  storage  space  in  units  of  3  feet,  7  feet, 
15  feet,  and  30  feet,  both  sides  of  car,  may  be  authorized 
in  baggage  cars  to  not  exceeding  pro  rata  of  the  rates 
hereinafter  named  for  60-foot  storage  rate. 

Mr.  Stewart.  I  will  say  in  that  connection  that  that 
question  was  submitted  to  the  Solicitor  for  the  Post  Office 
Department,  and  he  rendered  an  opinion  that  under  the 
statute  units  could  be  authorized  in  that  manner,  and  the 
department  applied  it  to  the  emergency  service  and  to  that 
service  onlv.  It  does  not  applv  otherwise.  (R.  1767, 
1768.) 

JUSTIFICATION  FOR  AUTHORIZATION  OF  EMERGENCY 
UNITS  ON  THE  PLAN  FOLLOWED  BY  THE  DEPART- 
MENT. 

Mr.  Stewart  stated  as  follows  during  the  direct  examina- 
tion of  Mr.  Searle,  in  a  colloquv  with  Attorney  Examiner 
Brown. 

Question  (by  Attorney  Examiner  Browx).  Well,  it 
would  be  impassible  for  a  carrier  to  provide  a  car  that 
would  cut  down  a  foot  every  time  you  come  to  a  town. 
If  the  figures  were  made  up  on  any  kind  of  an  authorization 
of  that  kind,  they  are  not  justified. 

Mr.  Stewart.  'Mr.  Examiner,  the  justification  of  that  is 
found  in  the  fact  that  this  car  is  run  in  the  consist  of  the 
train,  and  these  authorizations  are  never  made  excepting 
when  it  is  found  in  the  consist  of  a  train.  It  does  not 
require  the  company  to  put  in  a  foot  more  spare  tlian  it 
would  run  otherwise. 


148 

Attoniov  ExanuiuM-  Biu)W\.  Extictly,  but  it  lias  to  haul 
that  car. 

Mr.'  Stewart.  It  has  to  liaul  that  car,  and  this  is  the 
measure  of  the  service  rendered.  If  the  authorization  is 
not  made,  the  company  would  haul  the  car  anyhow. 

Attornev  Examiner  Bkown.  Well,  that  is  an  element 
that  might  be  taken  into  consideration.  If  they  had  no 
mail  to  carry  at  all,  they  would  have  that  car  on  that 
train;  is  that  the  point  you  make? 

Mr.  Stewart.  They  would  have  the  rest  of  the  car. 
They  have  a  30-foot  regular  authorization  in  that  car. 
The  rest  ol  that  car  is  run,  anyhow.  What  consideration 
should  be  given  the  company  for  running  that  additional 
30-foot  might  well  be  taken  ap,  but  here  is  30-foot  extra 
in  that  car,  for  which  the  company  claims  they  have  no 
use,  but  would  run.  Now,  the  department  believes  that 
thev  want  so  many  feet  of  space  from  point  to  point  in  the 
additional  space  of  the  car,  and  they  authorize  it.  The 
company  would  run  it  anyhow.  The  department  author- 
izes it  and  pays  for  as  much  as  they  occupy.  T  think  there 
should  be  some  consideration  on  both  sides  of  the  question. 

Attorney  Examiner  Brown.  Undoubtedlv.  (R.  2068, 
2069.) 

AUTHORIZATIONS  ARE  MADE  ONLY  FOR  THE  DISTANCE 
MAILS  ARE  REQUIRED  TO  BE  CARRIED. 

Mr.  Brauer  testified  on  cx'oss-examination  as  follows: 
Question    (by   Mr.  Wood)  .  So  that  the  amount  of  the 
space  authorized  for  emergency  deliveries  may  fluctuate  en 
route  independently  of  division  points  ? 

Answer.  Yes.  For  instance,  it  will  close  where  the 
mail  goes  out.  If  leaving  Omaha,  we  need  an  additional 
60-foot  car  on  the  Union  Pacific  to  Cheyenne,  it  closes. 
If  we  need  an  additional  3-foot  on  a  train  that  has  space 
in  a  baggage  car,  and  it  goes  off  at  an  intermediate  point, 
when  the  space  is  vacant  the  emergency  authorization 
ceases.     (R.  243.) 

COUNT  OF  SACKS  AND  PRACTICABLE  ALTERNATIVE. 
COUNT  OF  SACKS. 

Mr.  Stone  testified  on  re-cross  examination  as  follows: 
Question  (by  Mr.  Wood).  But  it  is  a  fact  that  in  mixed 
cars  the  railroad    company  is  not  paid  according  to  _  the 
space,  but  is  paid  according  to  the  count  of  sacks,  is  it 
not?    *     *     * 

The  Witness.  In  the  smaller  units,  it  would  be  deter- 
mined on  the  count,  but  if  half  a  car  or  more  were  needed, 
it  would  be  determined  on  the  space,  the  linear  feet. 


149 

Question  (by  Mr.  Wood).  How  do  you  deterniine 
wliether  a  half  car  or  more  is  needed  ? 

Answer.  Well,  our  men  can  (generally  estimate  approxi- 
mately wliether  half  a  car  would  be  needed  to  hold  a  certain 
quantity  of  mail.  If  necessary,  they  could  pile  the  mail 
and  measure  it  once  to  ascertain  what  the  regular  authori- 
zation should  be. 

Question.  Well,  he  guesses  at  it,  doesn't  he,  if  he  thinks 
it  requires  a  half  a  car  or  more  to  authorize  30  feet  without 
count,  and  if  he  does  not  think  it  requires  30  feet,  then  he 
has  the  packages  counted,  and  then  he  assumes  that  so 
many  packages  will  go  in  so  many  feet  of  space,  and  on 
that" basis  he  gets  the  average;  is  not  that  so  ( 

Answer.  No;  he  exercises  his  judgment.  He  uses  differ- 
ent factors.  He  miglit  use  the  number  of  bags  as  one  factor. 
Another  one  would  be  wliere  it  vrould  be  half  full,  quarter 
full,  or  a  full  section,  and  the  man  handling  that  can  get 
rather  expert  in  determining  whether  a  half  car  would  be 
needed  for  handling  that  mail  regularly. 

Question.  And  neither  one  has  any  rehation  to  the 
actual  space  occupied  ?  .       . 

Answer,  xis  soon  as  the  mail  is  put  into  a  car,  if  piled 
in  a  half  car,  he  can  determine  whether  a  half  car  is  full  or 
less  than  full.     (R.  397,  398.) 

IT  IS  ENTIRELY  PRACTICABLE  FOR  RAILROADS  TO  SET 
ASIDE  CERTAIN  SPACE  IN  BAGGAGE  CARS  FOR  THE 
MAILS  IF  THEY  CHOSE  SO  TO  DO  AND  DISCONTINUE 
ALL  COUNTS  OF  SACKS. 

Mr.  Gaines  testified  on  direct  examination  as  follows: 

Question  (by  Mr.  Stewart)  .  Mr.  Gaines,  you  heard  the 
testimony  of  Mr.  Mack  with  special  reference  to  the  service 
in  your  section,  also  the  testimony  of  Mr.  Searle '( 

Answer.  Yes,  sir. 

Question.  You  heard  also  thc_  testimony  of  the  other 
railroad  witnesses  on  other  subjects? 

Answer.  I  did. 

Question.  I  will  ask  you  what  you  have  to  say  with 
reference  to  their  contentions  that  it  is  impracticable  to 
set  aside  certain  space  in  baggage  cars  for  the  use  of  the 
mails  in  fulfillment  of  the  smaller  authorizations  of  units  ? 

Answer.  I  believe  it  is  entirely  practicable  to  do  that 
and  discontinue  the  count  of  bags.  I  am  not  advocatiiig 
it  l)ecause  it  seems  to  me  that  it  would  take  up  space  in 
the  baggage  cars  permanently  or,  at  least,  during  the 
term  of  the  unit  authorization,  which  we  frequently  do 
not  need,  and   which   the  railroad   company  can  us(>.     T 


150 

b('licA'-(>  it  would  be  entirely  practicable  to  have  the  space 
basis  administered  on  a  measurement  and  not  on  count  of 
bags.     (R.  3229.) 

And  again: 

Question.  Mr.  Gaines,  there  has  been  a  great  deal  said 
about  count  of  sacks  as  the  basis  for  authorizations.  You 
have  heretofore  expressed  some  views  about  the  neces- 
sity of  such  a  count.  Will  you  state  particularly  what 
yoii  think  in  regard  to  that  ? 

Answer.  In  answer  to  the  specific  claim  the  department 
has  not  committed  itself  to  the  space  basis  and  had  to 
resort  to  the  count  of  sacks,  will  say  that  in  my  judgment 
there  is  no  Railway  Mail  Service  reason  for  counting  the 
mail  instead  of  measuring  it  in  accordance  with  the  space 
occupied.  It  is  believed  that  all  of  the  authorized  units 
could  be  measured.  In  case  of  3-foot  units,  there  is  no 
necessity  for  using  any  additional  floor  space  if  the  baggage 
cars  are  used  to  their  capacity  for  baggage  and  express. 
The  few  pieces  usually  carried  in  a  3-foot  unit,  and  which, 
of  course,  does  not  average  anything  like  45  pieces,  can 
be  placed  on  top  of  the  baggage  and  express  for  delivery 
at  the  stations  at  which  baggage  and  express  is  to  be 
dispatched.    *     *     * 

Question  (by  Attorney  Examiner  Brown).  Well,  now, 
here  that  seems  to  be  against  your  argument.  You  say 
you  don't  think  there  is  any  necessity  for  the  count. 
Now,  you  say  in  the  small  unit  in  the  mixed  car  those  bags 
may  be  placed  indiscriminately  on  top  of  the  baggage  and 
on  top  of  the  express. 

Answer.  Yes;  I  say  that  that  is  what  is  being  done  now. 

Question.  Yes. 

Answer.  Tliat  arrangement  I  consider  for  the  conven- 
ience of  the  railroad  company. 

Question.  But  that  would  not  obviate  the  count, 
would  it  ? 

Answer.  It  could  be  handled,  in  my  judgment,  in  3 
feet  of  space,  if  3  feet  of  space  was  segregated  by  the  use 
of  movable  stanchions,  making  bins  3  feet  Avide  on  each 
side  of  the  car,  which  3  feet  on  each  side  of  the  car  would 
accommodate  an  average  of  45  sacks.  But  the  point  I 
was  trying  to  make  was  that  as  a  rule  that  3-foot  unit 
does  not,  on  the  average,  represent  anything  like  45  sacks 
in  the  car  at  one  time,  and  that  as  a  rule  it  would  be 
entirely  practicable  to  put  this  small  amount  of  mail  in 
3  feet  of  space,  3  feet  of  linear  space  on  each  side  of  the 
car,  and  that  there  would  not  be  this  Aery  great  efi'ort 
necessary  on  the  part  of  train  baggagemen  or  anyone  else 
handling  to  assort  that  and  put  it  off  at  the  stations  ad- 


151 

drossod.  I,  of  rourse,  know  that  there  are  exceptions  to 
that  riile:  but  I  don't  think  that  the  very  extreme  cases 
should  be  considered  anything  Ukc  the  average  normal  con- 
dition under  wliich  the  o-foot  unit  [•■>  carried.  (R.  3252- 
3254.) 

PRACTICABLE  TO  MEASURE  SPACE  UNITS  IN  BAGGAGE 
CARS  BY  USE  OF  MOVABLE  STANCHIONS. 

Mr.  GAi>fES  testified  on  direct  examination  as  follows: 

Question  (by  Attorney  Examiner  Brown.)  Now,  it  oc- 
curs to  me  there  at  that  point,  that  speaking  of  what  the  car- 
riers say  is  the  necessary  distribution  of  the  mails  in  the  bag- 
gage car — -I  think  it  was  Mr.  Brauer  who  testified  that  he 
did  not  believe  that  it  was  necessary  to  scatter  the  mail 
over  the  car.  that  stanchions  could  be  built,  or  bins,  or  what- 
ever you  might  call  them,  in  the  end  of  the  car,  say,  in  7 
feet  or  15  feet  which  was  authorized  in  the  baggage 
car,  and  that  the  mails  might  be  handled  in  that  way. 
Now,  supposing  the  carrier  puts  in  the  bins  and  stanchions 
in  the  car  to  conserve  to  the  department  the  space  that 
is  necessary  to  transport  the  mail  for  two-thirds  of  the 
route,  Mr.  Brauer's  plan  would  rather  emphasize  the 
proposition  that  is  presented  here  by  tlie  carriers,  that  there 
they  have  the  space  set  aside  for  the  Post  Office  Depart- 
ment, would  it  not? 

Answer.  No;  the  proposition  was  to  use  removable 
stanchions;  have  sockets  and  stanchions  that  could  l;e 
placed  in  position  or  removed.  In  fact,  that  is  the  ar- 
rangement that  is  in  force,  and  has  been  for  a  long  time, 
in  connection  with  storage  mail  cars.  The  stanchions  are 
removable,  very  easily  removable.  It  is  just  a  question 
of  putting  them  in  the  sockets.  I  mentioned  that  as  a 
possibility  at  the  time  of  the  first  hearing.  I  do  not  see 
anything  impracticable  about  the  proposition. 

Question.  That  is  to  say,  when  the  authorization  stopped, 
then  you  would  remove  the  stanchions  and  make  the  car 
available  for  baggage  or  express  ? 

Answer.  That  would  be  practicable,  although  I  am  not 
advocating  that;  but  it  is  simply  an  answer  to  the  state- 
ment of  the  railroad  people  that  we  are  on  the  count  and 
not  on  the  space  basis.  I  believe  the  present  metliod  is 
to  the  advantage  of  the  railroad  companies,  and  that 
l^utting  the  stanchions  in  would  be  a  V(>ry  great  iucoii- 
venience  to  them  in  some  train-^.  W.'  frer|ueiitly  do  not 
use  aU  of  the  space  that  we  have  authorized  for  the  mail, 
and  that  is  available,  as  I  stated  before,  for  any  railroad 
company's  use,  when  we  do  not  have  it  in  use  for  liand- 
ling  the  mail.     (R.  3275-3277.) 


152 

DESIRABILITY  AND  PRACTICABILITY  OF  ELIMINATING 
COUNT  OF  SACKS  IN  DETERMINATION  OF  SPACE 
UNITS. 

Mr.  Knox  testified  on  re-direct  examination  as  follows: 

Question  (by  Mr.  Stewart).  Now,  if  some  plan  could 
be  devised  which  would  do  approximate  justice  to  the 
railroads  and  to  the  department,  whereby  the  count  in 
these  cars  that  you  have  referred  to  could  be  eliminated, 
it  would  be  a  very  desirable  thing? 

Answ^er.  It  certainly  would,  Mr.  Stewart. 

Question.  Have  you  given  any  consideration  to  whether 
or  not  it  may  l)e  ])racticable  to  do  that  ? 

Answer.  1  have  thought  of  it  to  a  certain  extent,  and  I 
believe  that  the  counting  of  mail  in  relation  to  oversize  cars, 
undersize  cars,  and  to  storage  and  closed-pouch  units  can  be 
done  away  with,  in  the  last  two  instances,  providing  the 
company  can  see  its  way  clear  to  set  aside  a  certain  amount 
of  space  in  the  cars  in  wdiich  these  units  may  be  performed. 
(R.  3225,  3226.) 

COUNT  OF  SACKS  IN  SMALL  UNITS  MUST  BE  CONTINUED 
UNLESS  THE  CARS  ARE  STANCHIONED. 
Mr.  Brauer  testified  on  direct  examination  as  follows: 

Attorney  Examiner  Brown.  Well,  apparently,  under  the 
space  system,  there  is  no  feasible  and  practical  way  of 
avoiding  a  count — that  is,  I  mean,  on  these  small  units? 

The  Witness.  In  those  small  units,  unless  it  (the  car) 
was  stanchioned  off,  I  think  the  count  would  continue, 
unless  they  saw  fit  to  do  it.  They  know  that  in  this  bag- 
gage car,  and  in  practically  all  of  the  baggage  cars  on  this 
run,  they  are  expected  to  furnish  3  feet  on  each  side  of  the 
car,  and  7  feet  on  each  side  of  the  car,  for  the  mail,  and  they 
do  have  these  swinging  stanchions  in  a  good  many  storage 
cars.  They  swing  up  and  are  out  of  the  way.  If  the  mail 
does  not  occupy  the  space,  they  put' the  baggage  in  it.  That 
would  get  away  from  the  count,  until  it  came  to  the  emer- 
o^ency  unit.  Now,  the  emergencv  unit  is  a  verv,  verv  small 
percentage.     (K.  339S,  3399.) 

TROUBLES  IN  CONNECTION  WllH  COUNT  CF  MAIL  SACKS 
GREATLY  MAGNIFIED;  CCUNT  COUID  BE  ELIMI- 
NATED AND   SPACE  BASIS  CONTINUE. 

Mr.  Knox  testified  on  re-cross  examination  as  follows: 

Question  (by  Attorney  Examiner  Brown)  .  Now,  on  your 
space  basis  there  has  been  a  good  deal  of  controversy  here 
over  the  question  of  how  much  space  was  really  occupied, 
that  (h'ponding  upon  a  count,  I  ])elicve.    There  has  been  a 


153 

lot  of  testimony  here  about  the  count,  and  the  count  varies 
all  the  way,  some  fellow  testified,  to  a  variance  of  180 
sacks.    Do  you  see  much  of  that  in  your  division  ? 

Answer.  There  is  a  considerable  amount  of  mails  in  all 
divisions  that  we  have  to  count  under  the  present  practice. 
We  have  to  count  mails  into  these  oversize  cars  in  order  that 
we  may  know  when  we  have  filled  an  authorization.  For 
instance,  if  we  have  a  30-foot  apartment  authorization  and 
the  company  runs  a  60-foot  oversize  car,  the  only  means 
we  have  of  "knowing — that  is,  the  only  sure  means — that 
we  are  not  putting  mails  in  there  without  paying  the  com- 
pany for  them,  is  to  count  into  that  oversize  car  the  num- 
ber of  bags.  If  we  did  not  count  we  would  be  carrying 
mail  without  paying  the  company  for  it  at  times  when 
there  was  excess  mail. 

Question.  In  this  controversy  as  between  men,  as  be- 
tween individuals  who  do  the  counting,  you  are  continually 
in  trouble  now  to  determine  the  amount  of  space,  are  you 
not? 

Answer.  The  trouble  has  been  greatly  magnified,  Mr. 
Examiner,  I  think.  We  have  not  had  so  much  trouble. 
True,  there  are  letters  and  correspondence  in  relation  to  it. 
I  think  possibly  the  counting  feature  can  be  eliminated  and 
still  the  space  s^^stem  go  right  along.    (R.  3212,  3213.) 

DISPUTES  OVER  COUNT  OF  SACKS  NOT  A  SERIOUS  MAT- 
TER. 

Mr.  Brauer  testified  on  direct  examination  as  follows: 

Question  (by  Attorney  Examiner  Brown).  There  has 
been  some  evidence  here,  considerable  evidence,  about  dis- 
putes that  arise  over  the  count.  In  your  experience,  is 
that  a  very  serious  matter  ? 

Answer.  No. 

Question.  It  is  not? 

Answer.  No;  I  don't  believe  I  have  had  a  letter  on  it — ■ 
I  don't  remember  when.     (R.  3397.) 

DIFFERENCES  IN  EMERGENCY  SPACE  CLAIMS  OF 
RAILROADS  AND  ALLOWANCES  AS  MADE  BY  DE- 
PARTMENT DUE  TO  DIFFERENCE  IN  METHOD  OF 
ASCERTAINMENT. 

Mr.  Gaines  testified  during  the  direct  examination  of 
Mr.  Mack  as  foUows: 

Mr.  Gaines.  *  *  *  j  j^^ve  seen  both  ends  of  that 
car  partially  in  use  for  baggage  and  express,  when  we  were 
paying  for  it  as  a  mail  proposition,  and  that  is  the  case 
wherever  there  is  space  in  a  baggage  car  and  the  railroad 


154 

company  uses  part  of  that  spare  for  baggage  and  express. 
They  use  our  authorized  space  whenever  they  need  it;  and 
sometimes  they  use  it  when  we  need  it,  and  we  have  a 
good  deal  of  correspondence  along  those  lines. 

Mr.  Wood.  This  30  feet,  you  don't  think  there  is  any 
room  for  controversy  as  to  whether  there  is  or  is  not  an 
excess  of  bags  in  that  car  ? 

Mr.  Gaines.  *  *  *  The  railroad  company's  em- 
plo3^ees  are  not  conversant  with  the  rules,  and  they  are 
counting  and  we  are  measuring.  That  is  where  it  comes 
in.  It  is  perfectly  plain.  And  that  will  explain  the  dis- 
crepancies. I  have  endeavored  to  get  these  differences 
reconciled  at  their  source  and  I  have  not  succeeded  in 
getting  that  through.  The  railroad  people,  I  suppose, 
liave  their  own  reasons  for  not  wanting  it  done,  but  so  far 
have  not  been  able  to  accomplish  that.     (R.  1888.) 

BAGGAGEMEN  ON  MISSOURI  PACIFIC  LINES  AKE  NOT 
ACQUAINTED  WITH  THE  RULES  GOVERNING  THE 
SPACE  BASIS  AND  DO  NOT  KNOW  WHAT  THE  AU- 
THORIZATIONS  ARE   IN  THE   TRAINS. 

During  the  direct  testimony  of  Mr.  Mack,  ]\Ir.  Gaixes 
testified  as  follows  on  the  above  point: 

Mr.  Gaines.  There  is  a  30-foot  baggage  car  unit  there, 
Mr.  Examiner,  and  the  space  is  determined  by  measure- 
ment. We  measure  30  feet  of  space.  The  baggagemen 
on  the  lyiissouri  Pacific,  Texas  &  Pacific,  and  Iron  Moun- 
tain do  not  know,  have  never  been  acquainted  with,  the 
rules  governing  the  space  basis,  and  they  do  not  know 
what  the  authorizations  are  in  the  train.     (R.  1880.) 

IF  THE  COMMISSION  FOUND  THAT  IT  WAS  PROPER  TO 
MEASURE  THE  SPACE,  IT  WOULD  PROBABLY  ELIMI- 
NATE ALL  CONTROVERSY. 

Mr.  Searle,  manager  mail  traffic.  Rock  Island  lines,  tes- 
tified on  re-cross  examination  as  follows : 

Question  (by  Mr.  Stewart).  *  *  *  I  am  asking  now 
if  tlie  commission  should  find  that  it  was  a  proper  way 
to  measure  this  service,  wouldn't  that  be  prticticable? 

Answer.  If  the  commission  found  that  was  the  proper 
way  to  do  it,  I  should  be  very  glad  to  conform  to  any  rules 
that  the  commission  laid  down  in  that  respect. 

Question.  And  that  would  eliminate  all  this  controversy 
and  difficulty  over  the  emergency  ? 

Answer.  I  have  no  doubt  that  would  be  the  feeling  or 
idea  in  the  minds  of  tlie  commission — to  eliminate  all  con- 
troversy.    That  is  what  we  hope.     (R.  2145,  2146.) 


155 
CARS   FOR   RAILWAY   POST   OFFICE    PURPOSES. 

SAME  UNDER  WEIGHT  AND  SPACE  SYSTEM. 

THE  RAILROADS  OPERATED  THE  MAIL  CARS  UNDER 
THE  SPACE  BASIS  SYSTEM  THE  SAME  AS  THEY  DID 
UNDER  THE  WEIGHT  BASIS  SYSTEM. 

The  following  discussion  occurred  in  connection  with  the 
question  as  to  what  considerations  w^ere  given  to  previous 
car  conditions  when  the  space  basis  was  inaugurated : 

Mr.  Wood.  We  understand  it  to  be  the  position  of  the 
Post  Office  Department,  developed  b}^  their  witnesses  here, 
that  no  consideration  should  be  given  to  that  matter. 

Mr.  Stewart.  Counsel  does  not  state  the  matter  cor- 
rectlv.  The  position  of  the  department  is  that  under  the 
operation  of  this  statute  the  Government  can  ask  for  the 
space  it  needs  for  the  purpose  of  transportation  of  mails.  If 
it  needs  a  60-foot  car  a  requisition  is  made  for  that,  and  it 
is  furnished.  If  it  needs  a  30-foot  apartment  in  a  car,  it 
makes  requisition,  and  it  is  furnished.  The  same  way 
with  a  15-foot  car.  Under  the  weight  basis  system,  these 
companies  had  cars  of  all  dimensions  below  60-foot  cars. 
Some  of  them  had  40-foot  cars,  many  of  them  30,  25,  22, 
15,  and  12  foot  apartments  in  cars.  A  large  number,  equal 
to  the  needs  of  the  service  under  the  weiglit  system,  as 
the  trains  were  operated  by  the  companies  for  their  own 
convenience,  and  when  the  system  was  changed  and 
shifted  to  space,  the  conditions  continued  in  the  same 
manner  and  there  were  no  hardships  placed  upon  the  com- 
panies. There  were  certain  statutes  requiring  the  con- 
struction of  cars  in  accordance  with  the  provisions  of  the 
Postmaster  General's  plans,  the  companies  were  changmg 
cars  which  were  then  in  operation  and  had  been  m  opera- 
tion for  manv  years  which  did  not  comply  with  even  the 
requests  of  the  department  under  the  weight  basis,  but 
which  these  railroads  continued  to  operate  to  suit  their 
own  convenience.  Those  changes,  as  shown  by  the  exhibit 
submitted  by  the  department,  continued  to  be  made  after 
the  space  basis  became  established.  They  were  made  in 
practically  no  greater  ratio  afterwards  than  they  were  made 
before.  The  exhibit  shows  that  the  same  condition  that 
existed  under  the  weight  basis  was  continued  under  the 
space  basis,  and  if  there  was  any  hardshi])  im]K)sed  upon 
the  companies  under  the  space  basis  they  had  been  willingly 
accepting  it  and  fostering  it  and  agreeing  to  it  under  the 
weight  basis.     There  was  no  change  in  regard  to  that. 

Mr.  Wood.  I  assume,  of  course,  that  what  counsel  has 
said  is  not  a  part  of  tlic  testimony  in  the  case  and  will  not 


156 

be  so  regarded.  My  statement  of  our  understanding  of 
the  position  of  the  Post  Office  Department  was  based 
largely  upon  the  testimony  of  the  department  witnesses. 
That  testimony  can  not  be  changed  by  counsel,  except 
by  the  production  of  other  witnesses. 

'  Mr.  Stewart.  1  am  wilhng  that  it  shouhl  not  be  regarded 
as  testimony  any  more  than  tlic  statement  of  Mr.  Wood 
shouhl  be  regarded  as  testimony.  It  is  a  fact,  however. 
I  su])])ose  that  is  what  y3u  are  after. 

Attorney  Examiner  Brown.  Sure.  We  want  to  get  at 
the  facts,  "and  I  assume  that  counsel  on  both  sides,  when 
they  make  statements  here,  are  making  statements  of  fact. 

Mr.  Wood.  Mr.  Stewart  may  be  mistaken  in  the  fact. 
My  statement  was  based  on  the  record. 

AttDrney  Examiner  Brovv'n.  Yes;  I  so  understood. 

Mr.  Stewart.  So  did  I,  and  I  referred  to  the  exhibit  that 
evidences  it. 

Attorney  Examiner  Brown.  Tliat  is  to  say  that  when 
the  Government  ordered  the  change  from  the  Aveight  basis 
to  the  space  basis  m  November,  when  it  was  done,  trans- 
portation conditions,  so  far  as  the  carriers  are  concerned, 
were  unchanged;  that  is,  they  went  right  along. 

Mr.  Stewart.  Yes.      (R.  107()-1072J 

THE    RAILROADS    OPERATED    OVERSIZE    CARS    UNDER 
WEIGHT  BASIS  SYSTEM. 

Mr.  Knox  testified  on  direct  examination  as  follows: 

Question  (by  Mr.  Stewart)  .  Mr.  Knox,  was  it  the  general 
custom,  under  tlie  weight  system,  for  railroad  companies  to 
furnish  and  run  oversized  distribution  cars  in  lieu  of  requests 
and  authorizations  for  lesser  size  units,  and  will  you  please 
state  in  detail  your  information  upon  that  subject  ? 

Answer.  The  operation  by  railroad  com])anies  of  dis- 
tributing cars  larger  than  those  required  by  the  dei)art- 
ment  did  not  begin  with  the  introduction  of  the  sj)ace 
basis,  as  the  trend  of  testimony  of  railroad  witnesses  would 
seem  to  indicate.  Distributing  cars  of  40-foot,  50-foot, 
and  60-foot  Unear  measurement  were  authorized  and  paid 
for  by  the  department  in  addition  to  the  weight  of  the 
mails  on  any  route  under  the  old  weight  basis  system  of 
pay.  Several  sizes  of  apartment  cars  were  requested  by 
the  department  under  the  old  law,  but  were  not  paid  for 

Question.  Paid  for  specifically  ? 

Answer.  Not  paid  for  s])ecifically.  At  one  time  it  was 
customary  to  request  railroads  to  o])erate  hi  any  train  not 
requirhig  full  cars  for  distribution  purposes  the  following 
sizes  hi  distributing  apartments:  8-foot,  10-foot,  12-foot, 
1.5-foot,  20-fo()t,  and  25-foot.     The  authorization  for  full 


distri1)iiting  cars  and  the  i'('([iu^sts  for  (!istril)iitiiig  {ipart- 
ments  were  based  upon  the  handling  working  mails  to  be 
distributed,  ])oth  letters  and  ])ap(n-s.  Consideration  was 
also  given  to  furnishing  s])ace  for  first-class  and  registered 
mails.  Numerous  instances  can  be  cited  to  show  that 
railroad  companies  ran  oversize  60-foot  distributing  cars 
in  satisfaction  of  40-foot  and  50-foot  distributhig  cat  au- 
thorizations long  ])efore  the  space  basis  was  placed  into 
operation.  By  referring  to  division  schedules  of  mail 
trains  prior  to  November  1,  H)16,  hundreds  of  instances  of 
a]>artment  cars  operated  in  excess  of  the  size  requested, 
and  scores  of  instances  of  oversize  distributing  cars  oper- 
ated can  ])e  cited.  As  an  example,  first  division  schedule 
of  mail  trains.  No.  192,  dated  January  15,  1916,  furnishes 
the  following  information  under  the  schedule  of  Alburg  & 
Albany  railway  post  office:  Trains  64-865  and  864-65, 
30-foot  apartmejits,  25-foot  apartments  required :  trains 
54-9  and  82-59,  26-foot  apartments,  20-foot  required. 
Also  the  same  schedule,  showing  trains  o]>erated  on  the 
Beecher  Falls  &  Lancaster  railway  post  office  furnishes  the 
foUowhig  information:  Train  225,  22-foot  apartment, 
15-foot  required;  trahis  160  and  161,30-foot  apartments, 
15-foot  required;  train  378,  28-foot  ai)artment,  15-foot 
required. 

Saint  Albans  &  Boston  railwav  post  office:  Trains 
8-64-68  and  55-5,  one  40-foot  fine,  60-foot  and  41-foot 
provided;  trains  6-54  and  71-1,  one  40-foot  line,  60-foot 
provided;  trains  72  and  59,  30-foot  apartment,  15-foot 
required;  trains  75  and  60-210,  17-foot  apartment,  15-foot 
required. 

Referring  to  the  thirteenth  division  schedule  of  mail 
trains,  No.  48,  dated  February  5,  1916,  the  following  is 
shown  under  schedule  of  trains  for  Portland  &  Ashland, 
Oregon,  railway  post  office:  Train  11,  one  50-foot  letter 
car;  train  13,  one  40-foot  letter  car;  train  12,  one  40-foot 
letter  car;  train  16,  one  50-foot  letter  car— all  cars  fur- 
nished are  60  feet  in  length. 

Also  the  following  under  schedule  of  mail  train.s  for  the 
Pociitello  &  Portland  I'ailway  post  office:  Train  5,  one 
50-foot  and  one  40-foot  letter  car,  Pocatello  to  Portland: 
train  18,  one  40-foot  letter  car,  Portland  to  Pocatello;  train 
4,  one  50-foot  letter  car,  Portland  to  Pocatello — all  cars 
furnished  ai-e  60  feet  in  length.  Trains  17  and  6,  30-foot 
ai)artmejit  cars  (company  furnishes  60-foot  cars). 

Question.  Now,  when  you  said  the  cars  furnished  are 
60  feet  in  length,  you  meant  that  they  were  at  the  time 
the  schedules  were  issued  under  (ho  woif-ht  system? 

Answer.  They  were  furnisluHl  at  that  time;  ves. 


158 

Question.  Yes. 

Answer.  Those  sut  the  actuul  cars  operated  liy  the 
company  in  satisfaction  of  these  authorizations  and 
requests.  Un(hM-  the  schedule  of  mail  trains  for  the 
Spokane,  Pasco  Sz  Seattle  railway  post  ofhce,  the  followinji; 
authorizations  appear:  Trains  41-116  and  437-318,  60-foot 
cars,  30-foot  apartments  needed. 

Question.  Now,  were  they  furnished  >)y  railroad  com- 
panies voluntarily,  so  far  as  the  department  was  con- 
cerned '( 

Answer.  There  were  no  requests  made  on  the  ])art  of  any 
representative  of  the  dei)artment  for  any  distributing  unit 
in  excess  of  that  indicated  in  the  schedule  as  hehig  required 
or  authorized.     *     *     * 

Question  (hv  Mr.  vStewart).  Do  you  know,  Mr.  Knox, 
whether  or  not  it  has  been  the  custom  of  the  railroad  com- 
])anies  to  furnish  for  operating  purposes  such  cars  in  excess 
of  the  requests  without  any  speciKc  requirement  by  the 
department  ? 

Answer.   Yes:  that  is  true. 

*  *  *  *  * 

Question  (by  Mr.  Steavart).  Mr.  Knox,  have  you  made 
any  further  investigation  along  this  hne,  and  if  so,  can  you 
give  us  the  general  results  without  entering  into  the  details  ? 

Answer.  A  summary  of  the  cars  operated  ancl  cars 
requested  and  authorized  in  the  thirteenth  di\  ision  in 
September,  1916,  shows  that  87  lines  were  authorized  ov  in 
service  in  the  thirteenth  division,  and  on  57  of  these  lines 
oversized  cars  were  operated  by  the  companies. 

Question  (])y  Attorney  Examiner  Bnowx).  When  was 
that? 

Answer.  September,  1916,  one  month  before  the  space 
basis  went  into  effect.  In  the  fourteenth  division,  the  same 
month,  there  were  operated  a  total  of  94  railway  post-office 
lines.  On  these  lines  the  railway  companies  operated 
oversized  cars  in  81  of  the  94  lines,  leaving  but  13  lines  in 
which  the  cars  requested  and  authorized  by  the  department 
were  furnished. 

Question.  Well,  you  count  in  that  all  apartment  cars 
over  15  feet,  do  you  not,  where  the  department  has  ordered 
15-foot  cars,  and  there  was  anything  else  furnished,  or  30 
feet  or  any  other  kind  ? 

Answer.  I  got  down  to  the  smallest  unit  rec[uested  in 
those  days,  which  was  8  feet. 

Question.  Eight  feet  ? 

Answer.  And  hi  a  few  instances  it  was  6  feet  in  a  part- 
width  apartment  in  a  car. 


159 

In  the  fourteenth  division  at  this  time  the  excess  space 
amounted  to  1,062  linear  feet  each  day  one  way  in  the 
81  lines. 

In  the  second  division,  the  same  month,  there  were  112 
hues  in  which  the  oversized  cai-s  were  operated.  I  do  not 
know  how  many  lines  there  were  m  the  second  division; 
probably  150. 

In  the  tenth  division,  hi  the  same  month,  in  the  132  hnes 
operated,  the  companies  furnished  excess  space  amounting 
to  2.4S6  linear  feet  each  day  for  the  one-way  movement. 
In  the  fifteenth  division  31  Hnes  had  oversized  cars  and 
apartments,  involving  840  linear  feet  each  day.  The 
fifteenth  division  shows  that  there  were  thirty-six  70-foot 
cars  operated  to  fill  60-foot  distributing-car  authorizations, 
fifteen  70-foot  cars  operated  to  fill  50-foot  distributmg 
authorizations,  fifteen  70-foot  cars  operated  to  fill  40-foot 
authorizations,  two  lines  of  50-foot  cars  run  to  satisfy 
30-foot  apartment  requests. 

The  same  information  hi  relation  to  the  twelfth  division 
shows  practicaUv  the  same  results. 

In  the  third  division,  for  September,  1916,  as  compared 
with  October.  1916,  the  total  number  of  railway  post-oflace 
trains  hi  the  third  division  was  406.  Of  these,  138  trains 
had  the  same  railway  post-office  and  apartment-car 
authorizations  under  the  space  basis  in  October  as  under 
the  weight  basis  m  September,  or  a  total  of  34  per  cent. 

Question  (by  Mr.  Stewart).  You  mean  November,  ui- 
stead  of  October? 

Answer.  I  should  say  November:  yes.  There  were  201 
Imes  in  the  third  division  in  which  the  larger  apartments 
and  cbstributing  care  were  authorized  hi  November  under 
the  space  basis  than  were  authorized  and  requested  the 
previous  month  under  the  weight  basis,  or  a  total  of  49.5 
per  cent. 

Question  (bv  ^Ir.  Wood).  What  division  was  that  ( 
Answer.  The    third    division.     There   were    67    lines   in 
which  re(hictions  in   the  authorizations  were  made  from 
thos{>  previously  furnished,  hi  November,  as  agamst  Octo- 
l)er.  making  a  total  of  16.5  per  cent. 

Question  (bv  Mr.  Stewart).  Now,  Mr.  Knox,  does  this 
hulicate  that 'the  instances  which  you  have  mentioned 
were  fairlv  representative  of  the  conditions  throughout 
the  service  as  a  whole  prior  to  the  mstallation  of  the  space 
basis  and  for  some  years  before  that  ? 

Answer.  Yes,  sir".  These  instances  that  I  have  men- 
tioned are  tvpical  and  representative  of  conditions  through- 
out the  service  m  1916  prior  to  the  mstallation  of  the  space 
basis  and  for  many  years  previous.  They  show  that 
unusetl  and  unauthorized  space  was  constantly  operated 


IGO 

without  request  and  that  no  compensation  whatever  was 
paid  for  same,  and  those  famihar  with  the  service  at  that 
time  know  that  comparatively  httle  use  was  made  by  this 
space  on  the  part  of  the  department.  The  fact  that  the 
mails  were  paid  for  at  a  certain  sum  per  annum  for  each 
route  based  on  a  weighinj^  onc(^  in  four  years  does  not 
alter  the  fact  that  this  unused,  unnecessary  space  was 
operated  by  railroad  companies  without  request  from  the 
department,  and  that  the  only  possible  use  of  the  same 
was  to  place  therein  a  small  portion  of  storage  mail. 
(R.  3038-3046.) 

OVERSIZE  AN).)  UNDERSIZE  CARS  IN  USE  WHEN  SPACE- 
BASIS  SrSTEM  WENT  INTO  EFFECT  WERE  THE  SAME 
CARS   USED   UNDER   WEIGHT-BASIS    SYSTEM. 

Mr.  Kxox  testified  on  cross-examination  as  follows: 

Question  (by  Mr.  Wood)  ,  But  at  any  rate,  as  I  under- 
stood yesterday,  these  cars,  oversize  and  undersize,  as 
related  to  the  present  space  authorizations,  are  the  cars 
that  were  there  when  the  space  basis  went  into  effect,  and 
they  are  the  cars  that  are  there  now.     That  is  true? 

Answer.  They  are  the  cars  that  were  there  when  the  space 
basis  went  into  effect,  and  v^ith  the  exception  of  those  cars 
that  have  been  remodeled  during  this  period  they  are  the 
same  cars  that  are  in  use  now,  and,  I  might  say,  there  are 
some  new  cars  that  have  been  furnished  bv  several  com- 
panies.    (R.  3090.) 

UNDER  WEIGHT-BASIS  SYSTEM  RAILROADS  BUILT 
OVERSIZE  CARS  AND  OPERATED  THEM  ON  LINES 
WHERE  NEEDS  OF  SERVICE  DID  NOT  REQUIRE 
THEM. 

Mr.  Gaines  testified  on  direct  examination  as  follows: 

Question  (by  Air.  Stew^art).  jVIi-.  Gaines,  there  has  been 
considerable  said  in  regard  to  the  practice  under  the 
weight  system  of  furnishing  cars  in  greater  size  than  those 
asked  for  by  the  Railway  Mail  Service  to  fill  the  needs  of 
the  department.  What  are  the  facts  with  refererxe  to 
your  division,  just  briefly  stated? 

Answer.  That  is,  in  regard  to  the  oversize  cars? 

Question.  Tliat  is,  in  re(.;ard  to  what  are  now  called 
oversize  cars,  where  the  department  asks  for  cars  of  a 
desired  length,  and  the  pr-ictice  of  the  railroad  was  to 
furLiish  cars  of  greater  length. 

Answer.  Yes.  I  undorstund.  The  railroad  companies 
built  (^ars  and  were  using  them  on  a  very  large  number  of 
lines  in  excess  of  the  needs  of  the  service  under  the  weight 
l)asis  and  in  excess  of  our  ro(iuests  for  space. 


1«1 

An  examination  of  tlie  schedule  of  mail  trains  for  the 
eleventh  division  for  September,  1916,  the  last  schedule 
published  under  the  weight  basis,  shows  that  at  that  time 
there  were  114  railway  post-office  lines  in  the  division, 
and  that  on  184  trains  operated  over  83  of  the  114  railway 
post  offices,  the  cars  furnished  by  the  railroad  companies 
were  larger  than  needed,  and  that  in  each  case  the  rail- 
road compan}^  furnishiug  the  oversize  car  had  been  put 
on  notice  as  to  the  size  of  car  which  would  be  ample  to 
meet  the  needs  of  the  service.  The  size  of  the  car  required 
was  pu])lished  right  in  our  schedule  of  mail  trains.  The 
excess  space  ranged  from  2  to  30  linear  feet  per  car. 
Seven  lines  of  full  railway  post-office  cars  were  being  used 
in  the  division  in  lieu  of  apartment  cars.  The  total 
numl/cr  of  cars  needed  on  lines  where  the  excess  space 
was  furnished  by  the  railroad  company  was  2,668  linear 
feet  per  day.  Tlie  total  needed  and  asked  for  was  1,718 
linear  feet  per  day.  This  does  not  include  cases  where 
there  were  40-foot  railway  post-office  car  authorizations, 
and  60-foot  full  railway  post-office  cars  were  furnished  by 
the  railroad  companies  upon  the  request  for  40  feet.  It 
was  the  general  practice,  almost,  for  the  railroad  com- 
])anies  to  fiu-nish  60-foot  railway  post-office  cars  where  40 
feet  were  authorized  and  paid  i'or,  and  the  exceptions  to 
the  rule  were  few. 

The  Southern  Pacific  had  some  40-foot  cars  exclusively 
for  mail,  and  the  St.  Louis  &  San  Francisco,  and  possibly 
a  few  other  lines,  had  40-foot  mail  and  30-foot  baggage  cars. 

In  view  of  these  facts,  it  seems  certain  that  the  policy 
of  the  companies  was  to  build  cars  in  excess  of  the  needs, 
possibly  with  the  thought  that  there  would  be  more  mail 
carried  therein  and  handled  by  postal  clerks,  instead  of 
being  put  in  the  baggage  cars,  and,  I  suppose,  possibly, 
to  provide  for  the  future  grou'th  of  the  service.  At  any 
rate,  that  was  the  state  of  alYairs.     (K.  3277-3279.) 

CARS  IN  USE  WHEN  SPACE-BASIS  SYSTEM  WAS  IN- 
AUGURATED WERE  THE  SAME  AS  USED  UNDER 
THE  WEIGHT-BASIS  SYSTEM,  AND  RAILROADS 
HAVE  NOT  MADE  CHANGES  THEREIN  EXCEPT 
WHEN    SHOPPED. 

Ml.  Mack,  Mail  Traffic  Manager,  Missouri  Pacific  System, 
testified  on  cross-examination  as  follows: 
The  Reporter  (reading) : 

Question  (by  Mr.  Stewart).  Now,  coming  back  to  my  original  question 
*    *    *    and  I  think  you  did  answer,  that  those  cars  with  which  the 
service  on  the  space  basis  was  inauginatedlwere  the  cars  that  were  in 
existencf  at  the  time? 
122698—19 11 


Answer.  I  think  so;  yes,  sir. 

Question.  And  that  "there  has  been  no  effort  to  cJiange  them  in  the 
meantime  excepting  as  might  have  ])een  made  under  normal  conditions? 
***** 

Answer.  I  don't  know  that  thoro  has  l)oen  any  change 
made  in  the  cars.  There  were  ])rot)a])ly  some  here  and 
there.  Of  course,  with  regard  to  the  mail  cars  there  are 
always  some  changes  as  the  cars  are  shopped  and  the 
department  is  always  urging  changes  in  the  cars,  strength- 
ening them  and  improving  them,  and  we  improve  them 
]jy  improved  lights  and  improved  heat  and  improved 
ventilation  and  all  those  things.  That  is  part  of  the 
growth,  the  natural  growth  of  the  service.     (11.  2010,  2011.) 

APARTMENT  AND  FULL  POSTAL  CARS  UNDER  SPACE- 
BASIS  SYSTEM  SAME  AS  IN  USE  UNDER  WEIGHT- 
BASIS    SYSTEM. 

Mr.  Seakle  testified  on  direct  examination  as  follows: 

Question  (by  Mr.  Wood).  Before  the  adoption  of  the 
space  basis,  I  assume  that  you  had  in  operation  on  your  lines 
and  in  your  possession  various  types  of  fuU  railway  post- 
office  and  apartment  cars,  had  you  not  ? 

Answer.  Yes,  sir. 

Question.  Were  those  cars  cars  that  had  been  provided 
to  take  care  of  the  requirements  of  the  mail  service  as  it 
had  been  previously  conducted  ? 

Answer.  Yes,  sir;  the  same  cars.     (R.  2029.) 

CARS  BUILT  BY  COMPANIES  UNDER  THE  WEIGHT- 
BASIS  SYSTEM  BEYOND  THE  NEEDS  EXPRESSED 
BY  THE  DEPARTMENT  AT  THAT  TIME. 

Mi\  Mack  testified  on  cross-examination  as  follows: 
Question  (by  Mr.  Stewart).  Now,  referring  to  these  cars 
which  have  been  described  in  this  hearing,  of  these  various 
lengths,  is  it  not  true  that  many  of  them  were  built  by 
the  companies  beyond  the  needs  expressed  by  the  depart- 
ment at  the  time,  but  in  anticipation  of  growth  in  the 
service  ? 

Answer.  Well,  I  think  I  answered  that  by  showing  the 
development  of  those  cars  and  the  development  of  the 
Postal  Service  and  the  development  of  distribution  in 
those  cars  as  fully  yesterday  as  it  could  be  made ;  that  is 
to  say,  there  was  cooperation,  consistently,  from  the  begin- 
ning of  the  Postal  Service,  and  that  those  cars  were  the 
outgrowth  of  that  cooperation  and  understanding.  The 
railway  postal  clerks  were  generally  wanting  larger  cars, 
wanting  improvements  in  the  cars.  The  department  it- 
self was  asking  for  better  cars  and  improvements  in  the 
cars.     *     *     *     (R.  2013,  2014.) 


1G3 

THE  RAILROADS  HAVE  GENERALLY  BUILT  30-FOOT 
APARTMENT  AND  60-FOOT  RAILWAY  POST-OFFICE 
CARS. 

Mr.  Brauer  testified  on  cross-examination  as  follows: 

Question  (by  Mr.  Wood.)  So  it  is  safe  to  say  that  most 
of  these  2,653  lo-foot  authorizations  are  operated  in  cars 
in  excess  of  15  feet? 

Answer.  I  don't  know  whether  it  is  safe  to  say  that  ou 
not.     I  don't  know  how  many  have  been  changed. 

Question.  Well,  you  just  said  that  very  few  companies 
had  any  15-foot  cars. 

Answer.  Well,  that  is  a  fact.  The  policy  of  the  rail- 
roads was  to  build  30's  and  60's.  They  operated  the  30's 
and  lo's  without  any  authorizations.  They  operated  60's 
without  any  authorizations,  depending  upon  the  growth 
of  the  service.  Some  day  it  would  grow  up  to  the  needs 
of  a  60-foot  car.  There  were  very  few  40-foot  cars,  and  if 
tliere  are  anv  50-foot  cars  I  don't  loiow  where  they  are. 
*     *     *      (R:  3444.) 

VARYING  SIZES  OF  RAILWAY  POST-OFFICE  CARS  ON 
THE   BALTIMORE    &    OHIO   RAILROAD. 

Mr.  McCahax,  Manager  Mail  Traffic,  Baltimore  &  Ohio 
R.  R.  Co.,  testified  on  cross-examination  as  follows: 

Let  me  give  you  the  Baltimore  &  Ohio  ec^uipment  as  the 
result  of  our  experience  in  mail  service.  We  have  1  car 
from  9  feet  to  9  feet  11  inches;  we  have  1  car  15  feet  to 
15  feet  11  inches;  we  have  2  cars  16  feet  to  16  feet  11 
inches;  3  cars,  17  feet  to  17  feet  11  inches;  1  car,  18  feet  to 
18  feet  11  inches;  2  cars,  19  feet  to  19  feet  11  inches;  1  car, 
20  feet  to  20  feet  11  inches;  4  cars,  21  feet  to  21  feet  11 
inches;  2  cars,  24  feet  to  24  feet  11  inches;  19  care,  25  feet 
to  25  feet  11  inches;  2  cars,  26  feet  to  26  feet  11  inches; 
8  cars,  29  feet  to  29  feet  11  inches;  27  cars,  30  feet  to  30  feet 
11  inches;  2  cars,  31  feet  to  31  feet  11  inches;  and  1  car, 
32  feet  to  32  feet  11  inches. 

Now,  Mr.  Stewart,  I  present  that  to  show  the  conglom- 
eration of  mail  apartment  equipment  that  is  on  our  hands 
as  the  result  of  the  mail  service.  We  have  to  use  these 
excess  cars  on  these  runs,  no  matter  wliat  basis  you  put  in. 

Mr.  Stewart.  That  is  very  true,  and  it  is  a  very  eloquent 
argument  in  favor  of  these  definite  and  specific  units  which 
are  provided  for  by  statute  and  which  were  contemplated 
as  the  basis  for  this  ascertainment  of  cost  and  pay.  (R. 
2510,  2511.) 


164 

OVERSIZE  OARS   A   DISADVANTAGE   TO   THE  MAIL   SERV- 
ICE;  EXCESS     NOT     USED     FOR     DISTRIBUTION    PUR- 
POSES. 
OVERSIZE      CARS       SERIOUSLY      HAMPER      WORK      OF 
CLERKS    AND    RETARD    DISTRIBUTION    OF   MAILS. 
Mr.  Knox  testified  on  direct  examination  as  follows : 
Question    (by  Mr.  Stewart).     Now,  it  sometimes  hap- 
pens tliat  what  have  been  called  oversized  cars  are   furn- 
ished by  the  railroad  company  in  satisfaction  of  an  au- 
thorization of  lesser  length.     Wliat  have  you  to  say  in  re- 
gard to  those  oversized  distributing  cars  and    apartments 
in  cai's  now  operated  by  companies  on  many  lines,    as   to 
whether  they  are  advantageous  to  the  work  of    the  clerks 
employed  in  the  distributing  space  authorized  ? 

Answer.  Oversized  distributmg  cars  and  apartments 
now  operated  by  the  railroad  companies  on  many  lines 
throughout  the  several  divisions  seriously  hamper  the  work 
of  clerks  employed  in  these  distributmg  cars  and  retard 
the  prompt  distribution  of  mails.  Thus,  a  60-foot  railway 
post-office  car  run  for  the  convenience  of  a  railroad  com- 
pany m  satisfaction  of  a  30-foot  apartment  authorization,  m 
which  one  clerk  is  employed,  for  instance,  greatly  increases 
the  work  of  that  clerk.  This  is  because  of  the  excess,  un- 
necessary distributmg  furniture  and  equipment  in  the 
car,  which  makes  it  inconvenient  for  him  to  perform  the 
work  assigned  to  him,  m  addition  to  which  inconvenience, 
the  clerk  iji  cases  of  this  nature  is  generally  called  upon  to 
handle  storage  mails  under  baggage-car  or  storage  authori- 
zations m  the  oversize  mail  car,  wdiich  mail,  if  the  proper 
'30-foot  apartment  were  run  as  authorized,  would  be 
handled  by  the  baggageman  m  some  other  portion  of  the 
train. 

t^uestion.  It  w^ould  appear  from  what  you  have  said  that, 
in  addition  to  the  inconvenience  to  the  clerks  which  you 
have  mentioned  when  storage  mails  under  baggage-car  or 
storage  authorizations  are  carried  hi  oversize  cars,  the 
railway  postal  clerks  must  handle  such  mails  instead  of  the 
baggageman,  wdio  would  handle  them  if  carried  in  the 
other  portion  of  the  train,  thus  relieving  the  railroad 
employees  of  a  large  amount  of  work  which  they  would 
probably  be  required  to  do.  Is  that  correct  ? 
Answer.  Yes,  sir.     (K.  3033,  3034.) 

EXCESS      DISTRIBUTING      FACILITIES      IN      OVERSIZE 
CARS   NOT   USED   BY   POSTAL  CLERKS. 

Mr.  Kxox  testified  on  direct  examination  as  follows: 
Question  (by  Mr.   Stewart).  Wliat  have    you   to   say 
with   reference  to  the  testimony  of    various  railroad  wit- 


165 

nosses  to  the  effect  that  railway  postal  clerks  use  excess 
distribiitmir  facilities  in  oversize  cars  ? 

Answer.  The  excess  distributing  facilities  in  oversize 
cars  are  not  used  by  railway  postal  clerks,  as  has  been 
stated  by  witnesses  for  the  railroad  companies.  If  a 
30-foot  apartment  operates  in  a  train  carrying  15-foot 
authorization,  all  letter  pigeonholes  in  excess  of  156  and 
all  paper  rack  separations  and  boxes  in  excess  of  46  are 
unused.  The  rack  not  used  is  placed  in  a  nonuse  position, 
and  this  portion  of  the  rack  space  is  made  available  for  the 
carrying  of  any  storage  mails  that  may  be  due  to  be 
handled  in  the  tram.  No  such  use  can  be  made  of  the 
overhead  paper  racks  and  pigeonhole  separations,  and  these 
separations  remam  hi  the  car  without  use  to  the  depart- 
ment. 

Question.  That  is,  with  reference  to  the  distributing 
facilities  in  those  cars  ? 

Answer.  Yes,  sir.     (.R.  3034,  3035). 

EXCESS  SPACE  IN  OVERSIZE  CARS  USED  MORE  ADVAN- 
TAGEOUSLY FOR  RAILROADS  UNDER  THE  SPACE-BASIS 
SYSTEM  THAN  UNDER  WEIGHT-BASIS  SYSTEM. 

EXCESS  SPACE  IN  OVERSIZE  CARS  UNDER  WEIGHT- 
BASIS  SYSTEM  NOT  USED  TO  ADVANTAGE  OF 
RAILROADS    OR    DEPARTMENT. 

Mr.  Kxox  testified  on  direct  examination  as  follows: 

Question  (by  Mr,  Stewart).  Prior  to  November  1, 
1916,  when  the  space  basis  went  into  effect,  was  this 
excess  space  in  oversize  cars  which  you  have  been  de- 
scribing used  to  the  advantage  of  either  the  railroads 
or  the  department? 

Answer.  I  don't  believe  that  it  was.      (R.  3046.) 

EXCESS  SPACE  IN  OVERSIZE  CARS  UNDER  SPACE- 
BASIS  SYSTEM  USED  TO  MUTUAL  ADVANTAGE  OP 
RAILROADS  AND  DEPARTMENT  TO  HANDLE  MAILS 
FORMERLY    HANDLED    IN    BAGGAGE    CARS. 

Mr.  Knox  testified  on  direct  examination,  as  follows: 

Question  (by  Mr.  Stewart).  And  what  change,  if 
any,  occurred  in  this  respect  after  the  space  basis  be- 
came effective? 

Answer.  Excess  space  in  oversize  cars,  prior  to  Novem- 
ber 1,  1916,  was  not  used  to  any  appreciable  extent  for  the 
carrving  of  storage  mail,  whereas  now  this  excess  space,  if 
furnished  by  companies  in  oversize  cars,  is  used  to  the  limit 
of  the  capacity  of  the  car,  provided  the  railroad  company 


166 

does  not  expressly  request  that  the  mails  be  carried  in  the 
baggage  car.  The  present  practice  is  of  mutual  advantage 
to  both  the  department  and  the  railroad  companies,  as 
the  former  makes  a  saving  on  the  terminal  charge  author- 
ized on  the  storage  units  thus  carried  in  the  oversize  car 
and  the  latter  is  relieved  of  handling  this  storage  mail 
in  question  en  route  and  to  a  great  extent  at  terminals. 

Question.  Right  there,  Mr.  Knox,  do  you  refer  to  the 
handling  of  the  mails  to  which  I  called  your  attention,  I 
think,  in  the  early  part  of  your  examination,  which  is  made 
by  the  postal  clerks,  and  when  the  mails  are  carried  in  the 
excess  space  in  oversize  cars,  and  which  would  otherwise 
be  done  by  the  railroad  employees  if  they  were  earned  in 
the  baggage  car  ? 

Answer.  Those  are  the  mails  that  I  refer  to;   yes,  sir. 
***** 

Under  the  weight  basis  the  excess  space  was  not  so  used, 
as  I  have  before  stated.  As  an  example,  the  two  60-foot 
distributing  cars  operated  in  Pocatello  and  Portland  train  5 
contained,  prior  to  November  1,  1916,  but  little  storage 
mail.  Two  full  storage  cars  were  operated  in  the  train 
in  addition  to  these  two  full  size  distributing  cars,  making 
four  cars  exclusively  devoted  to  the  mails  in  the  train  in 
question.  Now,  these  two  distributing  cars  were  operated 
in  satisfaction  of  a  50-foot  and  a  40-foot  car  authorization. 

At  present,  the  excess  space  over  the  distributing  needs 
in  the  same  train  is  filled  to  capacity,  reducing  the  consist 
of  the  train  to  three  cars,  under  the  following  author- 
izations: One  60-foot  distributing  car,  one  60-foot  storage 
car,  one  30-foot  apartment  car,  the  latter  authorization 
being  satisfied  by  the  operation  of  an  oversize,  distributing 
car.     (R.  3046-3048.) 

RAILROADS   SHOULD    STANDARDIZE    POSTAL    CARS;   CON- 
VERTIBLE CARS. 

COMPANIES     SHOULD    MEET     PROBLEM    OF    OVERSIZE 
CARS    BY    STANDARDIZING    THEIR    EQUIPMENT. 

Mr.  Brauer  testified  on  cross-examination,  as  follows: 

Question  (by  Mr.  Wood).  Mr.  Brauer,  your  suggestion 
for  the  disposition  of  this  oversize  car  problem  is  that  the 
carriers  ought  to  change  their  cars  ? 

***** 

Answer.  I  think  so;  standardize  the  car. 
Question.  That  is  directly  contrary  to  the  representa- 
tions that  were  made  to  Congress  when  the  bill  was  passed  ? 
Answer.  I  don't  know  what  representations  were  made. 


167 

Question.  At  any  rate  you  are  speaking  for  the  Post 
Office  Department  in  taking  that  attitude  now  ?  You  are 
speaking  witli  authority  ( 

Answer.  We  have  been  alter  standard  cars  for  a  good 
many  years. 

Question.  I  am  not  speaking  of  standard  cars.  I  am 
speaking  of  changing  from  the  30-foot  down  to  the  15, 
both  of  which  are  standard.  In  saying  that  that  is  the 
proper  remedy  for  the  oversize-car  problem,  you  are 
speaking  authoritatively  and  stating  the  position  of  the 
Post  Office  Department  now  v.'ith  respect  to  it  i 

Answer.  I  think  so.  It  would  be  better  all  around.  It 
would  avoid  an}-  controversies  and  give  better  service. 
(R.  3572,  3573.) 

Mr.  Brauer  again  testified  on  cross-examination,  as 
f  oUows : 

Question  (by  Mr.  Wood).  *  *  *  Now,  my  question 
is  this:  If  we  are  to  be  paid  on  the  basis  of  space  furnished 
and  we  actually  do  furnish  to  you  and  you  use  in  one 
direction  a  30-foot  car,  even  though  the  distributing 
facility  in  that  car  may  be  a  few  feet  more  than  you 
require,  why  wouldn't  it  be  fairer  to  authorize  a  30-foot 
in  both  directions  instead  of  squeezing  us  down  to  a 
15-foot  authorization  of  an  apartment  car  in  both  direc- 
tions and  storage  in  one  direction  only  ^  The  car  reaUy 
operates  through  in  both  directions  on  that  train. 

Answer.  Why  wouldn't  it  be  proper  for  the  railroad 
companies  to  get  their  cars  to  standard  and  have  the 
department  pay  for  those?  Otherwise  cars  never  would 
become  standard.  And  if  the  department  paid  foj*  an 
oversize  car  whenever  such  was  furnished  by  the  carrier, 
would  we  ever  have  the  authorization  furnished?  (R. 
356S,  3569.) 

RAILROADS  SHOULD  REMODEL  OVERSIZE  AND  UNDEB- 
SIZE  CARS  rO  'FIT  CDlvfJITiaNS  WHEN  PERMANENT 
PLAN  OP  PAYMENT  IS  DECIDED. 

Mr.  Knox  on  cross-examination  testified  as  follows: 

Question  (by  Mr.  Wood).  Well,  now,  then  you  think  that 
the  railroad  companies  ought  to  be  required  to  change  those 
cars  over  ? 

Answer.  I  tliink  that  when  the  commission  has  decided 
as  to  the  permanent  method  of  payment  and  procedure  that 
whatever  the  plan  is  that  is  hiid  down  by  tlie  commission 
tlie  companies  then  should  remodel  tliese  cars  as  rapidly  as 
practicable  to  fit  tlie  conditions. 


168 

Question.  And  then  when  the  department  needs  30  feet 
additional  distributino;  facihties  the  company  has  cut  a 
30-foot  car  down  to  a  15,  then  tliey  ought  to  remodel  that 
car  and  make  it  30?  *  *  *  They  ought  to  keep  on 
doing  tliat  to  conform  to  what  the  Post  Office  Department 
hnds  from  time  to  time  to  be  the  fluctuating  reciuirements 
of  this  distributing  ? 

Answer.  From  time  to  time  as  the  country  grows  w^e 
will  need  more  distributing  facilities  on  various  lines.  If 
the  car  is  constructed  according  to  the  departmental  plan 
or  had  been  remodeled,  the  extra  distributing  facihties  can 
be  placed  in  the  car  at  a  minimum  expense,  not  very  large, 
and  we  would  not  expect  the  company  to  do  it  immediately, 
but  when  the  cai-s  go  into  the  shop.  Meanwhile  we  will 
get  along  with  such  facihties  as  they  can  afford,  or  as  they 
can  furnish  us,  I  will  say.     (R.  3094,  3095.) 

RAILROADS  WOULD  FIND  IT  TO  THEIR  ADVANTAGE  TO 
OPERATE  OVERSIZE  CARS  FOR  THEIR  OWN  PUR- 
POSES. 

Mr.  Knox  testified  on  re-direct  examination  as  follows: 

Question  (by  Mr.  Ste\vart).  Referring  to  the  oversize 
cars  about  wdiich  you  were  asked,  if  the  commission 
should  decide  to  continue  a  space  basis  and  should  pre- 
scribe certain  sizes  of  units,  do  you  think  the  railroads 
would  attempt  to  conform  their  cars  to  those  sizes  ? 

Mr.  Wood.  Is  he  qualified  to  answer  that  question  ? 

Mr.  Stewart.  I  am  asking  him  this  question  based  upon 
his  experience  with  the  raih-oads  and  not  as  a  railroad  man. 
I  asked  him  whether  he  thinks  it  is  probable  the  railroads 
would  conform  then'  cars  to  these  units  ? 

Mr.  Wood.  I  w^ould  just  as  soon  he  would  guess  at  it. 

Answer.  I  don't  think  they  would. 

Question  (by  Attorney  Examiner  Brown).  Now,  wdiy? 

Answer.  Based  upon  the  past,  they  would  prefer  to  con- 
struct cars  oversize  in  order  that  they  would  be  available 
for  increase  in  the  growth  of  the  service. 

Question.  Don't  you  think  that  is  a  wise  precaution  ? 

Answer.  I  think  so.     They  always  have  done  it. 

Question  (by  Mr,  Stewart).  So  that  as  a  matter  of  prac- 
tical operation  it  would  be  found  that  the  railroad  com- 
panies would  find  it  to  their  advantage  to  operate  oversize 
cars  under  tliose  circumstances  just  as  they  do  now? 

Answer.  I  tliink  it  w^ould,  yes.  They  would  get  the 
advantage  of  having  tlie  postal  clerk  handle  the  storage 
mail,  if  there  is  anv.  Also  that  must  be  borne  in  mind. 
(R.  3189,  3190.) 


169 

SPECIFIC    ADVANTAGES    OF    THE     SPACE-BASIS 
SYSTEM. 

PROVIDES  A  CERTAIN  MANNER  OF  DETERMINING  COM- 
PENSATION; BETTER  CONTROL  OF  DISPATCHES  OF 
MAIL;  ELIMINATES  EXPENSE  OF  WEIGHINGS  AND 
TABULATIONS;  GIVES  BETTER  AND  CLOSER  SUPER- 
VISION AND   CONSERVES  CAR  EQUIPMENT. 

Mr.  Kxox  testified  on  re-direct  examination  as  follows: 

Question  (by  Mr.  Stewart).  Do  you  think  the  space- 
basis  system  is  practicable  and  workable? 

Answer.  I  do. 

Question.  Will  you  state  briefly  what  you  think  the 
main  advantages  are  over  the  old  system  ? 

Answer.  The  si^ace  system  provides  a  certain  manner 
to  determine  the  amount  of  compensation  due  a  carrying 
com])any  for  mails  carried  at  any  time  and  at  all  times. 
Xo  ])lan  other  than  a  weighing  da}'  by  day  would  do 
this,  which  I  consider  entirely  impracticable.  It  ]:>rovides 
for  a  better  control  of  the  dis])atch  of  mail,  as  trains  will 
be  used  now  under  the  space  system  with  consideration  as 
to  when  mails  must  arrive  at  outward  terminal  and  not  be 
sent  forward  indiscriminately  on  all  trains  during  the  day, 
as  was  the  ])ractice  under  the  weight  system,  to  the  detri- 
ment of  the  railroads  carrying  same,  and  with  no  material 
advantage  to  the  de])artm"ent.  The  labor  of  weighing  and 
tabulating  weighings  under  the  old  quadrennial  system  of 
weighing  by  a  large  temporary  force  is  done  away  with. 
This  is  partly  offset  in  the  permanent  force,  to  a  certain 
extent,  which  force,  however,  is  permanent  and  does  not 
have  the  limitations  of  a  temjjorar}^  force  which  must  be 
emnloyed  and  discharged  from  time  to  time. 

The  space  system  also  makes  necessary  a  closer  super- 
vision and  a  better  knowledge  of  the  mail  service  on  the 
part  of  division  superintendents,  chief  clerks,  assistant 
chief  clerks,  transfer  clerks,  and  railway  postal  clerks, 
especially  the  clerks  in  charge  of  cars,  all  of  whom  have  to 
have  a  closer  knowledge  and  a  better  understanding  of 
the  entire  mail  service  than  they  did  before,  and  to  exer- 
cise a  more  careful  supervision,  especiall}-  those  who  have 
supervisory  capacity. 

The  s]mce  system  also  provides  a  conservation  of  ec(ui]i- 
ment,  not  so  much  of  er|ui])mcnt  as  to  bags  and  sacks  but 
the  equi])mcnt  used  by  railroads.  There  is  released  a 
great  many  trains  from  the  necessity  of  carrying  mails 
whicli  were  formerly  closed-pouch  trains  carr3ing  mails 
largely  on  account  of  the  whims  or  fancy  desires  of  ])Ost- 


170 

masters  at  various  ])laces.  We  do  not  authorize  seivice 
in  those  trains  now,  but  require  tliesc  ]iostmastcrs  to  ^et 
to,!Xether,  as  it  were,  and  to  *;et  their  mails  on  certain  trains, 
on  the  same  trains,  provided,  of  course,  you  do  not  injure 
the  service  at  any  place.  We  also  release  a  number  of 
storaire  and  bag^jage  cars  under  the  space  system  which 
may  be  used  by  the  railroads  for  other  ])urposes  under  the 
s))ace  system,  which  was  not  true  under  the  weioht  system. 
(R.  3192-3194.) 

MAILS  ARE  REQUIRED  TO  BE  CARRIED  IN  THE 
LIMIT  OF  SPACE  AUTHORIZED  UNDER  THE  SPACE- 
BASIS    SYSTEM. 

Mr.  Gaines  testified  on  direct  examination  as  follows: 

Question  (by  Mr.  Stewart).  Under  the  space  system, 
is  it  or  is  it  not  rec[uired  that  the  mail  shall  be  carried  in  the 
limit  of  s]>ace  authorized? 

Answer.  It  is. 

Question.  And  does  that  differ  from  the  practice  under 
the  weight  system  ? 

Answ'er.  There  was  a  tendency,  almost  imjiossible  to 
control,  for  railway  postal  clerks  to  send  mail  not  needed 
for  distribution  in  their  cars  to  the  baggage  cars  to  be 
carried  there,  except  mail  for  distribution  and  for  dispatch 
to  local  stations.  Tn  many  instances  it  was  claimed  by 
the  clerks  that  they  needed  more  s])ace  in  the  cars  for 
distributing  mail  than  we  find  is  entirely  necessary,  and 
they  are  required  now  to  load  the  mail  apartment  and 
mail  cars  to  their  capacity  be'"ore  requesting  any  mail  to 
be  sent  to  the  baggage  cars,  exceiiting  in  cases  where  there 
are  definite  units  provided  in  baggage  cars  and  found 
necessary  for  the  handhng  of  the  mail.      (R.  120,  121.) 

GREATER  FACILITY  OF  ADJUSTING  REQUIREMENTS 
OF  SERVICE  TO  THE  NEEDS  OF  THE  POSTAL  SERV- 
ICE UNDER  SPACE  THAN  UNDER  THE  WEIGHT-BASIS 
SYSTEM. 

Mr.  Gaines  testified  on  direct  examination  as  follows : 
Question  (by  Mr.  Stewart).  Will  you  state  the  differ- 
ence between  the  practice  under  the  weight  system  and  the 
spare  system,  with  respect  to  the  ability,  or,  we  will  say,  the 
facility,  in  adjusting  service  which  maybe  needed  as  it  arises, 
or,  rather,  adjusting  the  authorizations  to  the  service  as  they 
arise  and  may  be  needed  ? 

Answer.  Well,  on  account  of  the  close  supervision,  we 
have   unciuestionably  been   able   to   ascertain  when   any 


171 

certain  unit  of  space  was  not  needed,  or,  at  least,  to  a  great 
extent;  we  find  avenues  opening  up  from  time  to  time 
where  other  service  can  be  eliminated  without  detriment, 
where  there  can  be  consolidations,  and,  in  my  judgment, 
the  effect  has  added  to  the  economy  without  impairing 
the  efficiency  of  the  service. 

Question.  "Wliere  changes  occur  in  the  conditions  of 
railroad  service,  do  you  find  it  easier  to  adjust  the  service 
to  those  changes  under  the  space  system  ? 

Answer.  Yery  much  easier.  We  pay  the  companies  for 
the  service  they  actually  perform.  I  presume  you  refer 
to  cases  where  there  are  trains  withdrawn  ?  Where  there 
are  changes  in  schedules  ? 

Question.  Yes;  any  changes  of  that  kmd,  where  the 
department  has  to  adjust  its  service  to  the  railroad  service. 

Answer.  Well,  it  is  much  easier  to  adjust.  It  adjusts 
itself  almost  automatically.  If  a  train  is  withdrawn  from 
service,  the  expense  of  carrymg  mail  on  that  particular 
train  ceases,  and  the  question  of  either  diverting  to  other 
lines  or  of  consolidation  on  other  trains  on  the  same  system 
is  a  problem  before  us,  and  has  never  been  hard  of  solu- 
tion, so  far.      (K.  116,  117.) 

BENEFITS  OF  SERVICE  MAY  BE  MEASURED  BY  THE 
COST  TO  THE  DEPARTMENT  OF  THE  SERVICE  RE- 
QUIRED. 

Mr.  Gaixes  testified  on  direct  examination  as  follows: 

Question  (by  Mr.  Stewart).  Under  the  space  system 
the  service  is  authorized  with  specific  pay  for  specific  units 
of  space.  I  want  to  ask  you  whether  that  is  or  is  not  any 
advantage  to  the  department  with  respect  to  the  question 
as  to  whether  the  Government  is  receivmg  service  which 
is  commensurate  with  the  cost  of  the  same. 

Answer.  I  think  it  is  a  decided  advantage.  We  can 
measure  the  benefit  of  the  service  and  the  cost  of  that 
service.  We  pay  the  railroad  companies  for  the  service 
they  actually  perform.  When  we  ask  for  a  car  of  30-foot, 
or  of  any  other  size,  the  company  knows  exactly  what 
the  compensation  will  be  for  that  service.  Another 
advantage  is  that  the  operation  of  the  space  basis  makes 
it  necessary  for  close  supervision  on  the  part  of  the  officials 
of  the  railroad  mail  service.  I  believe  it  is  true  that  there 
is  more  supervision  given,  closer  supervision  given.  •  The 
benefits  in  that  direction  have  been  very  marked.  (R. 
Ill,  112.) 


172 

TENDENCY  UNDER  WEIGHT-BASIS  SYSTEM,  WHICH  DOES 
NOT  EXIST  UNDER  SPACE-BASIS  SYSTEM,  TO  AU- 
THORIZE SERVICE  WHERE  AND  WHEN  COST  OF  SAME 
TO  CARRIER  WAS  NOT  CONSIDERED  OR  FACILITIES 
WERE  UNNECESSARY.  RESULTING  IN  UNECONOMI- 
CAL OPERATION. 

Mr.  GxUNES  testified  on  direct  exammation  as  follows: 

Question  (by  Mr.  Stewart).  Was  there  any  tendency 
under  the  weijj^ht  basis  which  does  not  exist  under  the  space 
basis  to  put  definite  service  on  lines  where,  we  will  say,  it  was 
not  needed,  or  where  the  cost  of  the  service  was  not  ade- 
quately considered  with  reference  to  the  service  rendered 
to  the  public  ? 

^\nswer.  There  was  such  a  tendency.  A  railroad  com- 
pany's compensation  was  neither  increased  nor  decreased 
according  to  the  amount  of  service  rendered.  We  could 
demand  that  they  carry  mail  upon  any  train.  We  could 
require  them  to  operate  an  apartment  car  on  a  line  where 
the  advantage  was  very  slight,  where  the  service  might 
have  been  performed  equally  as  well,  or  practically  as  well 
and  satisfactorily,  by  closed  pouches,  because  the  increase 
in  cost  to  the  department  in  those  cases  was  not  great;  in 
other  words,  that  the  measure  of  service  did  not  represent 
the  difference  in  cost. 

Question.  Did  this  lead  to  unnecessary  or  unecononiical 
authorization  of  apartment-car  service,  under  the  weight 
system  ? 

'  Answer.  It  had  a  tendency  that  way.  There  was  no 
specific  charge,  as  I  have  already  stated,  against  the 
department  for  the  operation  of  apartment  cars,  cars  of 
30  feet  or  less,  and  it  was  unciuestionably  true  that  there 
was  a  considerable  amount  of  service  that  was  not  actually 
necessary  for  the  proper  servmg  of  the  people. 

Question.  What  effect  did  that  have  on  the  question  of 
the  number  of  railway  post-office  clerks  needed  on  the 
lines? 

Answer.  It  increased  the  number  of  clerks. 

Question.  What  effect,  if  any,  did  it  have  upon  the  mail 
equipment  necessary  in  post  offices  ? 

Answer.  Well,  any  additional  service  w^ould  call  for 
more,  or  less  additional  equipment.  I  do  not  know  that 
the  effect  in  the  post  offices  was  very  marked,  as  far  as 
additional  railway  post  offices  were  concerned,  but  when 
adchtional  and  "unnecessary  closed-pouch  service  was 
placed  on  trams  it  had  some  effect  upon  the  equipment  in 
post  offices  then. 


173 

Question.  "VATiat  was  the  tendency,  so  far  as  the  practice 
was  concerned,  with  reference  to  esta])lishing  closed- 
pouch  exchanges  under  the  weight  basis  ? 

Answer.  The  tendency  was  extravagance  in  that  direc- 
tion. Due  consideration,  I  believe,  was  not  always  given 
to  the  effects  to  be  derived  from  additional  pouch  ex- 
changes, although  I  will  say  that  I  have  not  personal 
knowledge  of  some  of  the  unnecessary  exchanges  to  an 
extent  that  I  understand  prevailed  elsewhere. 

Question.  That  tendency  would  be  more  pronounced  in 
that  part  of  the  country  where  the  mail  service  was  more 
frequent  than  in  the  eleventh  division  ? 

Answer.  It  is  true  that  that  is  the  case,  that  our  traui 
service  in  the  eleventh  division — the  number  of  trains  is 
not  so  numerous  that  there  was  any  very  great  number  of 
exchanges  that  were  not  needed  to  make  the  service  what 
it  should  be.     (.H.  112-114.) 

ONLY  SUCH  SERVICE  AS  IS  SPECIFICALLY  AUTHORIZED 
IS  REQUIRED  OF  RAILROADS  UNDER   SPACE-BASIS 

SYSTEM. 

Mr.  Gaixes  testified  on  du-ect  examination  as  follows : 
Question  (by  Mr.  Stewart).  Under  the  space  system  is 
it  or  is  it  not  true  that  you  require  of   the  railroad  com- 
panies only  such  service  as  is  specificall}"  authorized  by 
the  department? 

Answer.  That  is  true.     (R.  110.) 

Mr.  Brauer  testified  on  direct  examination  that  Mr. 
Gaines's  testimony  with  reference  to  the  administration  of 
the  space  system  is  substantially  true  as  to  his  division,  as 
foUows : 

Question  (by  Mr.  Stewart)  .  You  heard  the  testimony 
of  Mr.  Gaines  1 

Answer.  Yes,  sir. 

Question.  Will  you  state  whether  or  not  the  testimony 
which  he  gave  with  reference  to  the  administration  of  the 
space  system  is  substantially  true  as  to  the  division  over 
which  you  are  superintendent  ? 

Answer.  Yes;  outside  of,  perhaps,  a  few  local  condi- 
tions.    (R.  234.) 


174 

UNDER  THE  SPACE-BASIS  SYSTEM,  AS  DISTINGUISHED 
FROM  THE  WEIGHT-BASIS  SYSTEM,  THE  DEPART- 
MENT GIVES  AND  THE  RAILROADS  RECEIVE  PAY 
FOR  THE   ACTUAL  SERVICE  RENDERED. 

Mr.  Gaines  testified  on  direct  examination  as  follows : 

Question  (by  Attorney  Examiner  Brown).  Well,  under 
the  weight  basis,  you  paid  f(n*  the  weight  whether  it  was 
transported  or  not,  did  you  not  ? 

Answer.  We  have,  under  certain  conditions,  Mr.  Exam- 
iner. 

Question.  You  had  a  weighing  at  a  certain  period  ? 

Answer.  Yes. 

Question.  That  was  the  basis  for  the  payment  for  the 
next  four  years  ? 

Answer.  Yes. 

Question.  Now,  your  mails  might  increase  or  they 
might  decrease,  and  you  would  be  paying  the  same  ? 

Answer.  We  were  paying  the  same. 

Question.  And  under  the  space  basis,  suppose  you  had  a 
30-foot  car,  how  long  would  it  be  before  you  would  find  out 
that  you  were  onl}^  using  15  feet  of  it? 

Answer.  Under  the  supervision  that  we  now  have  the 
time  would  be  very  limited  indeed.  In  fact,  we  can  keep 
such  track  of  the  service  that  a  considerable  diversion  of 
mail  from  a  line  where  we  were  needing  30  feet  of  space — a 
considerable  diversion  which  would  make  it  possible  to 
perform  that  service  on  that  same  line  with  a  15-foot  car — 
would  at  once  attract  attention. 

Question.  Now,  on  the  weight  basis,  did  you  not  have 
any  supervision  ? 

Answer.  We  had  supervision,  but  under  the  weight 
basis  the  compensation  was  fixed  for  a  period  of  four  years, 
and  it  made  no  difi'erence  to  the  department  whether  that 
mail  was  carried  on  one  line  or  anotlier,  so  far  as  the  com- 
pensation to  the  companies  was  concerned.  The  company 
carrying  the  mail  at  the  time  of  the  weighing  received 
payment  for  the  service  on  the  basis  of  the  service  per- 
lormed  during  the  weighing  period,  regardless  of  whether 
the  mail  increased  or  decreased  over  any  certain  line. 
*  *  *  *  * 

Question.  Well,  getting  down  to  brass  tacks,  the  carrier 
is  entitled  to  pay  for  what  it  hauls  and  the  Government  is 
entitled  to  be  charged  for  what  the  carrier  hauls.  Now,  in 
your  judgment,  as  the  superintendent  of  this  division,  does 
the  space  basis  give  to  the  carrier  pay  for  what  it  does,  and 
does  it  give  to  the  Government  the  service  for  which  it 
pays  ? 


175 

Answer.  It  gives  to  the  carrier  pay  for  what  it  does. 
As  to  whether  the  rate  is  commensurate  or  not,  I  can  not 
say. 

Question.  Xo;  that  is  another  matter. 

Answer.  It  does  give  to  the  carrier  pay  for  the  service 
performed,  and  the  Government  gets  the  benefit  of  the 
money  expended. 

Question  (by  Mr.  Stewart).  Now,  Mr.  Gaines,  does 
this  same  rule  apply  to  the  space  in  mixed  cars  as  well  as  in 
the  fuU  apartment  cars  ? 

***** 

Answer.  It  does. 

Question.  And  storage  mails  ? 

Answer.  It  does.     (K.  127-130.) 

SPACE-BASIS  SYSTEM  PAYS  RAILROADS  FOR  ALL  SERV- 
ICE  PERFORMED   BY   THEM. 

Mr.  Knox  testified  on  re-cross  examination  as  follows: 
Question  (by  Attorney  Examiner  Bkowx").  AVell,  that  is 
a  give  and  take  proposition  to  arrive  at  justice  between  all 
the  railroads  and  the  Government.  You  can  not  hope,  it  is 
impossible,  the  commission  could  not  do  it,  and  all  the  men 
3'ou  could  get  together  on  an}"  one  proposition  could  not 
do  it,  and  it  would  be  exactly  right  to  a  gnat's  heel  with 
respect  to  every  railroad  in  the  country,  considering  the 
length  of  the  liauls  and  all  the  manner  and  methods  of 
handling.  Now  ideally,  of  course,  the  proposition  is  if 
you  can  find  out  some  way  and  som^ehow,  that  the  railroads 
shall  get  paid  on  the  weight  they  haul,  3^ou  have  got 
the  tiling  do^vn  to  the  proper  basis.  That  is  the  ideal 
situation.  Now,  remembering  that  it  is  up  to  the  commis- 
sion to  determine  what  tliis  sliall  be  for  the  future,  whether 
it  shall  be  weight  or  space,  you,  as  a  practical  man,  are 
here,  I  assume,  trying  to  help  the  commission  to  reach 
what  is  a  proper  conclusion,  and  you  have  evidenced  some 
of  the  objections  to  the  weight  basis  on  j^our  theory,  that 
the  weight  can  not  be  ascertained  with  accuracy.  Let  us 
assume  that  for  the  purpose  of  the  argument — that  you 
can  not  do  it;  and  from  month  to  month  and  from  year 
to  year.  You  could  not  have  weigliin^s.  you  could  not 
weigh  every  piece  of  mail  that  went  on  the  train  as  you  do 
freight,  therefore  you  have  got  to  have  some  way  of  get- 
ting the  estimate  of  the  weight.  You  say  that  is  out  of 
the  question.  Now,  let  us  turn  to  the  space  basis.  Are 
there  any  objections  to  that  on  the  same  ground,  that  the 
carriers  are  required  necessarily  to  perform  a  service  for 


176 

which  they  woukl  got  no  pay?  Now,  offset  one  against 
the  other,  and  where  do  you  come  out? 

iVnswer.  I  don't  behove  that  the  carriers,  under  a  space 
basis  after  it  has  been  approved  by  the  commission  and 
we  have  gone  past  the  fighting  stage,  as  you  might  call  it, 
with  the  companies — because  this  has  been  a  trial  in  which 
naturally  there  would  not  be  the  cooperation  that  there 
would  be  after  it  has  been  decided,  assuming  that  the  space 
basis  were  decided  upon — that  there  would  be  very  little 
difficulty  in  adjusting  the  matter  with  each  individual 
company,  and  that  we  could  pay  them  practically^  every 
day  for  every  bit  of  service  performed  under  the  space 
basis.     That  is  my  opinion. 

Question.  When  it  comes  down  to  the  last  analysis  it  is 
a  question  of  payment,  anyhow,  is  it  not? 

Answer.  It  is  a  question  of  payment.     (R.  3202-3204.) 

SPACE-BASIS  SYSTEM  SATISFACTORILY  COMPENSATED 
RAILROADS  FOR  CARRIAGE  OF  UNUSUAL  MAILS  RE- 
SULTING  FROM   WAR   CONDITIONS. 

Mr.  McBride,  superintendent  Railway  Mail  Pay  Statis- 
tics, Post  Office  Department,  testified  on  direct  examina- 
tion as  follows: 

Since  the  date  of  the  entrance  of  the  United  States  into 
the  war,  in  April,  1917,  there  have  been  many  instances 
where,  under  the  weight  basis,  railroads  would  have  been 
compelled  to  haul  carloads  of  mail  long  distances  without 
additional  compensation,  mails  which  they  did  not  carry 
during  a  weighing  period.  These  mails  were  the  result  of 
the  establishment  of  army  training  camps  and  cantonments 
at  various  places  throughout  the  country.  In  ever}^  case 
of  this  kind,  where  these  unusual  conditions  arose,  and  it 
was  necessary  for  the  companies  to  furnish  additional  cars 
for  the  transportation  of  these  mails,  they  have  been  paid 
for  the  same.  Additional  full  storage  cars  were  authorized 
and  payments  made.      (R.  3723,  3724.) 

UNDER  WEIGHT-BASIS  SYSTEM  NO  CONSIDER  A.TION 
GIVEN  TO  FLUCTUATION  IN  THE  MAILS  WHICH  IS 
REPRESENTED  ON  SPACE-BASIS  SYSTEM  BY  EMER- 
GENCY SERVICE  UNITS. 

Mr.  Pettibone,  of  the  Northern  Pacific  Railway,  testi- 
fied on  cross-examination  as  follows: 

Question  (by  Mr.  Stewart).  The  weight  was  based  on  an 
average  taken  105  days  once  in  four  years.  Now,  if  that  was 
taken  and  your  pay  fixed  there  was  absolutel}"  no  con- 
sideration given  to  the   company   with  reference   to   the 


177 

fluctuation  in  the  mails,  which  is  observed  here  and  repre- 
sented by  these  emergency  service  units.     Is  not  that  true  ? 
iVnswer.  I  think  as  you  state  it  it  is  true.     (R.  2412.) 

SAVING  IN  CAR   SPACE   UNDER   SPACE-BASIS   SYSTEM. 

Mr.  Gaines  testified  during  cross-examination  as  follows: 

Question  (by  Mr.  Ashbaugh).  Can  you  explain,  from  an 
operating  standpoint,  why  the  decrease  has  taken  place  as 
shown  on  that  exhibit  ? 

Answer.  Well,  I  answered  Mr.  Wood  along  the  same 
lines,  that  it  was  due  largely  to  improved  methods  of  dis- 
tribution of  mail,  of  the  withdrawing  from  the  trains  the 
distribution  of  circular  matter,  in  some  cases  ordinary 
paper  mail,  catalogues,  and  the  economical  administration 
of  the  service,  but  without  delaying  anj^  of  the  letter  mail 
or  daily  papers  or  registered  mail. 

Question.  Yes;  and  in  doing  so,  how,  and  in  what  pro- 
portion, has  the  equipment  of  which  each  train  was  made 
up  been  reduced  ?  In  exact  proportion  to  your  reduction 
of  the  space  authorized  as  shown  bv  this  exhibit  ? 

Answer.  You  mean  other  than  the  mail  cars  ? 

Question.  No;  I  am  taking  the  mail  car  as  applying  to 
aU  of  these  now. 

Answer.  In  a  great  many  cases,  it  has  meant  an  absolute 
withdrawal  from  the  train  of  certain  storage  and  railway 
post-ofhce  cars. 

Question.  Yes. 

Answer.  We  might,  as  I  explained  before,  have  a  run 
where  we  were  using  six  60-foot  cars  in  a  mail  train,  and 
by  withdrawing  a  certain  class  of  mail,  which  I  have 
described,  from  distribution  in  that  train,  and  having  it 
worked  in  the  terminals,  we  might  reduce  the  consist  of 
that  train,  we  will  say,  by  two  cars.     (R.  202,  203.) 

Mr.  Gaines  testified  on  re-direct  examination  that  there 
was  no  incentive  under  the  weight-basis  system  to  econo- 
mize in  car  space  as  there  is  under  the  space  basis.system, 
ag  follows: 

Question  (by  Mr.  Stewart)  ,  1  think  you  said  something 
about  the  possibility  of  having  made  ali  of  these  changes 
that  affected  these  economies  in  the  utilization  of  space 
in  the  reduction  of  space,  that  they  might  have  been  made 
largely  under  the  weight  system.  Is  it  not  true  that  there 
was  no  incentive  whatever  to  make  them  under  the  weight 
system  ? 

Answer.  Absolutely  not  the  incentive  that  there  is  under 
the  space  basis. 

122098—19 12 


178 

Question.  And  it  would  be  extremely  improbable  that 
they  would  be  so  made  ? 

Answer.  Very.  At  any  rate,  they  were  not  made. 
(R.  218.) 

Mr.  Brauer  testified  on  re-direct  examination  as  follows  : 

Question  (by  Mr.  Stewart).  You  said  you  thought  all 
these  reforms  which  have  been  suggested  could  have  been 
made  under  the  old  weight  basis,  I  assume  that  you  mean 
it  was  possible  to  make  them  ? 

Answer.  It  was  possible. 

Question.  Do  you  think  that  they  ever  would  have  been 
made? 

Answer.  I  do  not. 

Question.  That  is  based  upon  your  experience — long 
experience  in  the  field  as  a  post-office  inspector  ? 

Answer.  Absolutely. 

Question.  And  also  as  an  official  of  the  Railway  Mail 
Service,  during  which  time  it  was  your  special  duty,  was 
it  not  as  an  inspector,  to  inspect  these  lines  and  recommend 
changes  ? 

Answer.  To  a  certain  extent.     (R.  247,  248.) 

ALL   ESSENTIAL    DISTRIBUTION    EN    ROUTE    IS    BEING 
MADE    UNDER    SPACE-BASIS    SYSTEM. 

Mr.  Gaines  testified  on  cross-examination  as  follows: 
Question  (by  Mr.  Wood)  .  You  think  there  is  just  as  much 
mail  being  distributed  on  the  trains  now,  with  all  of  this 
reduction  in  railway  post-office  train  facilities,  as  there  was 
before  the  space  basis  went  into  efl'ect  ? 

Answer.  I  think  there  is  just  as  much  essential  distribu- 
tion. We  have  the  use  of  the  terminals,  as  I  explained 
before,  in  the  distribution  of  certain  classes  of  matter,  but 
the  letter  mail  is  being  distributed  en  route  just  the  same 
as  before,  and  the  daily  papers  are  being  distributed  en 
route  just  as  they  were  before.     (R.  180.) 

Mr.  Gaines  testified  on  re-cross  examination  that  the 
reduction  of  distribution  on  cars  has  not  impaired  the 
service,  as  follows : 

Question  (by  Mr.  Wood)  .  And  you  do  not  know  whether 
it  has  been  impaired  by  reason  of  the  discontinuance  of 
that  service  that  has  already  })een  made  or  not  ? 

Answer.  I  think  I  can  speak  for  my  division,  that  it  has 
not.     (R.  228.) 


179 

GREATER  INCENTIVE  TO  RAILROAD  TO  FURNISH  CARS 
UNDER   THE    SPACE-BASIS    SYSTEM. 

Mr.  Stone  testified  on  cross-examination  as  follows: 

Question  (by  Mr.  Wood).  So  that,  so  far  as  their  extend- 
ing that  contract  service  is  concerned,  your  power  is  just  as 
great  under  one  system  as  under  the  other  i 

a^jiswer.  Theoretically,  yes;  the  power  is  there,  but  you 
can  see  the  incentive  is  not  there  for  the  raikoad  company 
to  respond  with  additional  service  when  request  is  made. 

Question.  But  the  railroad  company  has  to  respond? 

Answer.  But  we  can  onl}*  enforce  it  by  fines  and  penal- 
ties, and  there  may  be  considerable  delays  before  we  get 
the  service.  The  railroad  service  is  what  we  want,  of 
course. 

Question.  Well,  the  railroad  company,  under  the  pres- 
ent basis,  could  violate  the  regulation  of  the  department 
and  be  fined,  just  as  well  as  under  the  old  basis  ?  If  you 
are  going  to  assume  that  they  are  going  to  break  the  law, 
the  two  bases  stand  on  the  same  ground,  do  they  not  ? 

Answer.  Theoretically;  but  when  we  go  to  the  company 
and  say,  "We  want  this  car,  and  you  will  be  paid  for  it 
at  the  Vnd  of  the  month,"  there  is  a  bit  of  incentive  there 
to  furnish  it.  "When  we  go  to  a  company  and  say,  "We 
want  the  car  and  won't  pay  any  more  for  it,"  the  incentive 
is  not  there  to  furnish  it  promptly.  They  may  be  com- 
pelled to,  eventuall}'.      *     *     * 

Question.  I  am  going  back  to  your  answer,  which  is  that 
the  advantage  of  the  present  space  basis  over  the  old  weight 
basis  is  that  under  the  old  weight  basis  when  yoii  wanted 
an  additional  apartment-car  service  there  was  no  mcentive 
for  the  railroad  company  to  respond  to  that  freely,  because 
it  got  no  pay  for  it.  Now,  I  say,  assuming,  and  contmumg 
still  the  weight  payments  just  as  they  were,  the  Interstate 
Commerce  Commission  should  in  this  case  say  what  pay 
the  railroad  company  should  have  for  an  apartment  car  as 
well  as  for  a  railway  post-office  car;  that  is,  for  the  use  of 
the  distributing  facilities  in  those  cars — there  would  be 
just  the  same  incentive  then  to  respond  to  the  furnishing 
of  that  service  at  the  rate  which  the  commission  has  fixed 
as  there  is  to  respond  to  it  at  the  rates  which  Congress  has 
fixed  and  which  the  carriers  claim  is  madequate,  would 
there  not  ? 

Answer.  I  think  not,  because  your  question,  as  I  under- 
stand it,  says  assuming  the  weight  basis  to  be  continued. 
That  is  impossible.  If  there  is  a  fjuadrennial  weighing,  no 
matter  whether  you  put  on  the  additional  car,  they  would 
not  immediately  get  the  benefit  of  any  additional  mail 


180 

that  miglit  be  attracted  to  it,  whereas  under  the  space 
basis,  when  they  put  on  additional  cars,  they  furliish  just 
as  much  space  as  may  be  needed,  and  they  are  paid  for 
exactly  what  they  furnish.     (R.  364-367.) 

SPACE  BASIS  PREFERABLE  FROM  AN  ADMINISTRA- 
TIVE POINT  OF  VIEW;  PAYS  FOR  ALL  SERVICE  REN- 
DERED. THERE  IS  NO  RECOGNITION  OF  FREQUENCE 
OF   SERVICE   UNDER    WEIGHT   BASIS. 

Mr.  Stone  testified  on  cross-examination  as  follows: 

Question.  (By  Mr.  Wood).  The  exammer  asked  you 
which  had  been  the  more  satisfactory  from  the  standpomt 
of  the  department,  and  you  answered  the  space  basis. 
As  I  got  your  answer,  it  dealt  largely  with  the  question  of 
pay.  Now,  from  the  purely  administrative  standpoint 
in  your  department,  for  simplicity  of  operation,  which 
is  the  more  satisfactory,  the  space  basis  or  the  weight 
basis,  purely  as  an  administrative  question,  irrespective  of 
the  matter  of  the  pay  ? 

Answer.  I  would  prefer  the  space  basis. 

Question.  Why? 

Answer.  Well,  you  may  say  I  am  getting  back  to  pay, 
but  it  is  because  we  can  get  just  what  we  want  at  any  time. 
Here  is  the  proposition:  Under  the  weight  basis,  yo\u  might 
have  service  established  on  one  train  each  way,  with  an 
apartment  car,  we  will  say.  There  may  be  another  train 
operated  each  way.  We  go  to  the  railway  company,  and 
we  say,  ''We  want  to  put  service  on  these  other  two  trains; 
we  want  to  put  an  apartment  car  on  those  two  trams." 
The  company  says,  ''"What  additional  pay  will  you  give 
us?"  And  we  say,  "Nothmg."  They  think  that  is  not 
businesslike,  and  are  somewhat  reluctant  to  furnish  the 
additional  car  and  equipment.  We  now  go  to  them  and 
we  say,  "We  want  an  additional  30-foot  apartment  car 
on  those  two  additional  trains,"  and  we  pay  so  much,  and 
of  course  there  is  readiness  to  respond. 

Question  (by  Attorney  Examiner  Brown).  Well,  in 
actual  practice,  did  you  go  to  a  raih'oad  and  say  you  want 
a  car  hauled  for  mail  purposes  on  that  Ime  and  back,  and 
never  paid  for  it  ? 

Answer.  Yes;  that  is  true,  for  apartment-car  service, 
because  the  weight  law  provided  that  there  be  this  weighing 
once  m  four  years,  and  it  was  on  the  basis  of  6  times  a 
week  service,  and  they  got  no  more  pay  for  12  times  a 
week  service  or  10  times  a  week  service. 

Question.  On  the  theory  that  they  carried  no  more 
mail? 


181 

Answer.  Yes;  of  course,  that  weight  was  divided  up 
among  the  several  trains  without  increasmg  the  frequency, 
and  may  not  bring  more  weight  m  some  cases. 

Question.  Well,  if  they  had  a  quadrennial  weighing,  that 
would  not  make  any  difference  ? 

Answer.  Until  the  next  weighing.      (R.  362-364.) 

ADDITIONAL     SERVICE     PERFORMED     WITHOUT     ADDI- 
TIONAL COMPENSATION,  UNDER  THE  WEIGHT-BASIS 
SYSTEM. 
Mr.  Gaixes  testified  on  direct  exammation  as  follows: 
Question  (by  Mr.  Stewart).  "What  have  you  to  say  with 
reference  to  the  amount  of  service  that  might  be  required 
of  the  railroad  companies  under  the  weight  basis,  as  com- 
pared with    the  service  which  might  have  been  required 
durmg  the  weighing  period  ?     Did  it  change  ? 

Answer.  It  might  vary  very  greatly.  Changes  of  sched- 
ules would  make  it  necessary  to  divert  mail,  sometirnes 
m  large  quantities.  The  railroad  companies  handling 
the  diverted  mail,  unless  a  special  weighing  were  allowed, 
performed  that  additional  service  without  additional  com- 
pensation. The  companies  where  the  mail  had  been 
previously  carried  contmued  to  receive  remuneration  for 
the  carriage  of  mail  which  no  longer  passed  over  their 
Ime.     (R.  111.) 

THE  SPACE-BASIS  SYSTEM  IS  RESPONSIVE  TO  INCREASE 
IN   WEIGHT   CARRIED. 

Mr.  Stoxe  testified  on  cross-examination  as  follows: 

Question  (by  Mr.  Wood)  .  To  what  extent  is  the  space 
basis  responsive  to  an  increase  in  the  weight  of  the  mail 
carried  ? 

Answer.  Well,  if  ^our  weight  increases,  it  takes  more 
space,  and  when  we  ask  for  more  space  we  pay  for  it  at 
once. 

Question.  To  what  extent  do  the  apartment  cars  wnich 
are  run  to-day  carry  to  the  limit  of  their  capacity  ? 

Answer.  Well,  l"' could  not  answer  as  to  that.   *     *     * 

Question.  Have  you  any  idea? 

Answer.  Well,  we  order  cars  according  to  the  amount  of 
mail  to  be  carried.  If  we  order  a  15-foot  apartment  car, 
it  is  because  we  think  the  mail  to  be  carried  can  be  accom- 
modated in  that  apartment.  If  we  ask  for  a  30-foot  apart- 
ment, it  is  because  we  think  we  have  more  than  enough  to 
make  a  full  15-foot  apartment,  and  that  it  can  be  accom- 
modated in  a  30-foot  apartment;  but  if  you  want  me  to  say 
what  per  cent  of  the  car  is  actually  filled  with  mail,  I  have 
no  data  on  that.     (R.  369,370.) 


182 

Mr.  Stone  on  cross-examination  also  testified  as  follows: 

Question  (by  Mr.  Wood.)  Now,  if  there  has  been  a  con- 
traction in  the  space  and  an  increase  in  the  weight,  in 
what  way  has  the  space  basis  been  resjionsive  to  the  in- 
crease in  weight  by  providing  pay  for  the  railroads  ? 

Answer,  ^^'ell,  it  would  seem  "that  possibly  we  were 
using  more  space  under  the  weight  system  than  we  needed. 
Now,  after  going  to  the  space  system,  we  adjust  our  space 
to  what  we  actually  need  for  "the  weight  that  is  offered. 
(R.  375.) 

Mr.  Stone  on  cross-examination  also  testified  as  follows: 

Question  (by  Mr.  Wood).  Now,  if  it  be  a  fact,  as  you 
think  it  is,  that  there  has  been  no  net  increase  in  the  space 
authorized  within  a  year— about  a  year  ago,  I  think  they 
claimed  it  was  ''shaken  down" — do  you  think  there  has 
been  an  increase  in  the  weight  within  the  year  ? 

Answer.  I  think  very  likely. 

Question.  Now,  if  those  two  conclusions  of  yours  are 
correct,  upon  what  basis  do  you  think  the  space  basis  is 
responsive  to  the  increase  in  weight  and  gives  the  railroad 
companies  full  pay  for  that  increase  ? 

Answer.  W^hen'the  space  system  first  went  into  effect, 
of  course  we  could  not  gauge  exactly  the  exact  amount  of 
space  that  would  be  needed  to  transport  the  mail.  We  did 
the  best  we  could,  to  start  it.  Then,  we  began  these  re- 
adjustments, and  as  we  proceed,  we  are  probably  arriving 
at  a  more  correct  basis  of  space  for  the  weights  and  bulk 
and  distribution  of  the  mail.     (R.  376,  377.) 

Mr.  Stone  on  cross-examination  also  testified  as  follows: 

I  think  the  statement  that  the  service  was  then  stabilized 
is  a  general  one.  1  do  not  mean  that  that  was  conclusive 
as  to  the  amount  of  space  that  w^as  needed.  I  think  our 
needs  for  space  must  necessarily  change,  and  as  we  inspect 
our  different  fines  and  get  later  data,  why,  we  need  more 
here,  and  there  we  need  less,  and  there  \\dll  alwa3^s  be  these 
readjustments,  in  order  to  fix  the  space  exactly  in  accord- 
ance with  what  is  needed  to  transport  the  mail.  (R.  378.) 
Mr.  Stone  on  cross-examination  also  testified  as  follows: 
Answer.  Yfell,  you  understand,  I  do  not  pretend  to  say 
that  absolutely  there  has  been  no  increase  in  space  as  a 
whole.  I  do  not  control  the  statistics  of  that  division,  or 
have  charge  of  it.  There  may  have  been  a  net  increase 
in  the  space,  but  I  do  know  this,  that  when  there  is  an  in- 
crease in  the  mail  on  any  particular  day  or  at  any  particular 
place,  and  it  needs  an  additional  storage  car  to  carry  it,  we 


183 

order  it,  and  it  goes  out  at  once.  There  is  an  increase  on 
that.  At  some  other  pLace,  there  is  a  regular  authoriza- 
tion for  a  storage  car,  and  if  we  find  the  mail  falls  off  and 
we  do  not  need  it,  we  stop  it  at  once.  There  may  have 
been  a  net  increase  in  space.  I  can  not  speak  positively 
on  that:  but  I  do  say  that  we  are  adjusting  constantly 
this  space  according  to  our  needs,  not  only  for  weight,  but 
tor  bulk  and  for  the  distribution  of  the  mail.     (R.  379.) 

I^Ir.  Stone  on  rc-direct  examination  also  testified  as 
follows : 

Question  (by  Mr.  Stewart).  With  reference  to  the 
c[uestion  as  to  whether  the  service  is  responsive  under  the 
space  system  I  call  your  attention  to  the  fact,  if  it  be  a 
fact,  that  increases  and  changes  in  authorizations  are 
constanth'  made  by  the  department. 

Answer.  They  are. 

Question.  \That  relation,  if  any,  have  those  changes  to 
the  subject  matter?     Do  they  represent  responsiveness? 

Answer.  Yes.     Those  changes  keep  the  authorizations 
adjusted  to  the  needs,  whether  increases  or  decreases. 
*  *  *  *     .  * 

Question.  I  will  ask  you  if  it  is  not  true  that  the  service 
is  very  closely  su])ervised  in  the  field,  and  we  take  into 
consideration  not  onh  the  load  of  the  working  cars,  but 
the  facihty  for  working  the  mails  *  *  *  when  the 
needs  of  the  service — I  mean  the  space  already  occupied, 
growing  out  of  either  one  or  both  conditions,  reciuires  more 
facility,  is  it  not  requested  and  furnished  ? 

Answer,  it  is.     (R.  394,395.) 

MORE  STORAGE  MAILS  HANDLED  IN  MAIL  CARS  UNDER 
SPACE-BASIS  SYSTEM  THAN  UNDER  WEIGHT-BASIS 
SYSTEM.  OPERATING  TO  RELIEVE  RAILROAD  EM- 
PLOYEES  OF   MAIL  HANDLING. 

Mr.  Brauer  testified  on  direct  examination  as  follows: 

Question  (by  Mr.  Stew^art).  Has  there  been  a  change 
in  that  respect  under  the  space  basis,  whereby  the  space 
in  the  car,  the  oversized  working  car,  is  more  or  less 
utilized  for  the  carriage  of  this  storage  mail  ? 

Answer.  Well,  we  handle  a  good  deal  more  mail  under 
the  space  basis  in  the  mail  cars  than  we  did  prior  thereto, 
and  of  course,  in  the  oversized  mail  cars,  we  handled  storage 
units. 

Question.  And  where  that  is  done,  who  cares  for  that 
mail  ? 

Answer.  The  mail  clerk. 


184 

Question.  So  that  iiiuler  the  space  system,  that  change 
has  operated  to  relieve  the  employees  of  the  railroad  com- 
])aiiy  ill  the  handling  on  the  trains  of  all  the  classes  of 
mail  which  are  transported  in  that  manner? 

Answer.  1  would  think  so.     (R.  2934.) 

THE  SPACE  SYSTEM,  AS  DISTINGUISHED  FROM  THE 
WEIGHT  SYSTEM,  HAS  HAD  A  TENDENCY  TO  CON- 
SOLIDATE LOADS  AND  EFFECT  ECONOMIES  IN  THE 
OPERATION   OF   FULL    STORAGE    CARS. 

Mr.  Gaines  testified,  on  direct  examination,  as  follows: 

Question  (by  Mr.  Stewart).  What  tendency,  if  any, 
has  there  been  under  the  space  system  to  prevent  the 
running  of  f  uU  storage  cars  with  small  quantities  of  mail  ? 

Answer.  The  tendency  has  been  to  consohdate  loads  and 
to  effect  economies  in  the  operation  of  fuU  storage  cars. 

Question.  Has  that  been  specially  marked  where  the 
mails  could  all  be  carried  in  the  cars  operated  in  the  train  ? 

Answer.  It  has. 

Question.  Under  the  weight  system,  was  it  or  was  it  not 
customary  to  operate  storage  cars  upon  more  days  of  the 
week  than  were  necessary  and  than  are  operated  under 
the  space  system;  also  as  to  holidays  and  days  following 
holidays,  state  what  change,  if  any,  has  occurred  in  that 
respect. 

Answer.  I  will  say  that  from  my  personal  knowledge, 
on  account  of  the  small  number  of  storage  cars  in  regular 
operation  in  the  eleventh  division — I  can  not  state 
definitely,  except  as  the  operation  of  storage  cars  during 
the  holiday  period.  As  there  was  no  additional  expense 
at  that  time  to  the  department  incident  to  the  operation 
of  storage  cars,  there  was  a  tendency  to  use  more  of  them 
than  actually  necessary,  and  to  begin  the  movement  of  the 
storage  cars  earlier  and  continue  it  longer,  possibly,  than 
was  found  under  the  space  basis  to  be  entirely  necessary  for 
the  proper  handling  of  the  mail.  The  storage  cars,  as 
well  as  any  other  storage  units,  are  now  operated,  as  far 
as  can  be  determined,  only  on  the  days  when  the  volume 
of  mail  passing  over  any  particular  route  will  make  that 
necessary.  They  are  limited  to  live,  six,  or  any  other 
number  of  days  during  the  week  when  experience  shows 
that  on  certain  days  they  can  be  eliminated  without 
detriment,  and  the  mail  which  used  to  be  carried  on  seven 
days  in  those  cars  is  placed  in  other  space  in  the  train. 
(R.  114,  115.) 


185 

Mr.  Brauer  testified  on  direct  examination,  as  follows: 

Question  (by  Mr.  Stewart).  You  have  had  special 
acquaintance  with  a  part  of  the  country  where  storage 
cars  have  been  used  to  a  considerable  extent.  WiU  you  teU. 
the  examiner  what  effect,  if  any,  the  space  system  ad- 
ministration has  had  upon  the  release,  for  instance,  of 
cars  heretofore  used  for  storage  of  mails? 

Answer.  Well,  as  a  general  proposition,  it  has  resulted  in 
a  big  reduction,  because,  under  the  weight  basis,  we  carry 
largely  all  but  the  working  mail  in  storage  cars.  For  in- 
stance, the  road  that  I  ran  on  as  a  clerk — the  Santa  Fe  road 
out  of  Chicago,  ran  a  storage  car  out  of  there  every  day  in  the 
week  on  the  train  that  I  was  assigned  to.  Very  often,  there 
probably  would  not  be  a  half  truck  load  of  mail  to  go  in 
there  on  Sunday  night,  but  that  car  was  operated  just  the 
same,  and  was  run,  as  far  as  I  knew,  all  the  way  to  Los 
Angeles. 

Question.  Now,  what  occurred  under  the  space  system 
in  regard  to  that? 

Answer.  Well,  that  was  discontinued  immediately,  the 
operation  of  such  space. 

Question.  And  the  equipment  turned  back  to  the  rail- 
road companies? 

Answer.  Yes.     (R.  235,  23G.) 

POST-OFFICE  SUPPLIES  AND  EMPTY  EQUIPMENT,  WHICH 
UNDER  WEIGHT-BASIS  SYSTEM  WERE  CARRIED  IN 
FREIGHT  CARS,  ARE,  UNDER  THE  SPACE-BASIS  SYS- 
TEM, CARRIED  IN  RETURN  MOVEMENTS  OF  OTHER- 
WISE EMPTY  MAIL  CARS,  RELEASING  RAILROAD 
EQUIPMENT   AND    SAVING   EXPENSE. 

Mr.  Gaines  testified  on  direct  examination  as  foUows: 

Question  (by  Mr.  Stewart).  Mr.  Gaines,  in  your  ex- 
perience as  superintendent  of  your  division,  have  you 
acquired  personal  knowledge  with  respect  to  the  change 
in  the  method  of  transporting  empty  equipment  or  blue-tag 
mails  or  supplies  in  freight  trains  ? 

Answer.  I  have,  especially  as  it  relates  to  Post  Office 
supplies  and  empty  equipment.  We  do  not  liandle  blue- 
tag  mail  in  the  division  to  any  extent.  We  are  now  hand- 
ling it  only  into  the  Houston  terminal.  It  is  coming  by 
water  from  New  York. 

Question.  WiU  you  explain  to  the  examiner  what  that 
change  has  been  ? 

Answer.  Under  the  weight  basis,  empty  equipment  was 
assembled  at  certain  points  and  forwarded  from  those 
points  by  freight.     In  the  aggregate,  a  very  great  number 


18G 

of  freight  cars  were  used  in  transporting  that  equipment. 
Now,  the  equipment  is  handled,  as  a  rule,  in  return  move- 
ment of  storage  and  postal  cars,  and  the  effect  has  been 
to  utilize  cars  in  their  return  movement  by  placing  the 
empty  bags  therein,  very  materially  reducing  the  time 
in  transit  to  points  where  needed,  and  releasing  the  freight 
cars  for  other  service.  It  might  be  well  to  explain  that,  as  a 
rule,  the  same  amount  of  space  is  not  needed  in  both  direc- 
tions over  a  line.  In  my  division,  the  heavy  movement 
of  mails  is  south  and  west  bound.  The  normal  movement 
of  surplus  equipment  was  east  and  north  bound ;  so  we  can 
now  utilize  the  space  which  would  be  vacant  if  we  were 
operating  under  the  weight  basis.  We  can  utilize  the 
space  not  needed  in  the  direction  of  the  hght  movement 
of  the  mail. 

Question.  And  which  space  is  paid  for  ( 

Answer.  And  which  space  is  paid  for.     (R.  125,  126.) 

THE  CARRIAGE  OF  EMPTY  MAIL  EQUIPMENT  IN  THE 
RETURN  EMPTY  MAIL  CARS  UNDER  THE  SPACE 
SYSTEM  RETURNS  THE  EQUIPMENT  TO  USE  SOONER 
THAN  WAS  POSSIBLE  UNDER  THE  WEIGHT-BASIS 
SYSTEM   PRACTICE    OF  HANDLING. 

Mr.  Gaines  testified  on  direct  examination  as  follows: 

Question  (by  Mr.  Stewart)  .  Now,  in  connection  with 
the  quicker  dispatch  or  return  of  empty  equipment  to  the 
place  where  it  is  to  be  reused,  what  advantage  accrues  to 
the  service  generally  from  the  new  system  'i  Do  you  get 
the  use  of  the  equipment  sooner? 

Answer.  We  get  the  use  of  the  equipment  very  much 
sooner.  Under  the  old  system,  from  the  eleventh  division, 
a  very  large  part  of  the  surplus  equipment  was  being  sent 
by  boat  from  Galveston  to  New  York,  and  would  be  on 
the  water,  I  suppose,  about  five  or  six  days  in  transit, 
after  being  assembled  at  Galveston  for  carload  lots.  (R. 
134.) 

UNDER  THE  SPACE-BASIS  SYSTEM  BLUE-TAG  MAILS 
WHICH  THERETOFORE  WENT  BY  FREIGHT  ARE  CAR- 
RIED IN  MAIL  CARS  AND  THE  FREIGHT-CAR  SPACE 
TURNED  BACK  TO  THE  RAILROADS. 

Mr.  Brauer  testified  on  direct  examination  as  follows: 
Question  (by  Mr.  Stewart)  .     What  change,  if  any,  was 
made  with  reference  to  the  blue-tag  matter  ?     I  think  you 
have  had  experience  in  a  section  of  the  country  where  you 
would  observe  that. 


187 

Answer.  Well,  blue-ta^  matter  from  the  West  to  the 
East  went  by  freight.  It  now  goes  back  in  the  return 
movement  of  the  storage  car.  You  understand,  of  course, 
that  the  big  movement  of  the  mail  is  from  the  East  to  the 
West,  and  there  is  a  lot  of  vacant  space  going  east,  and 
that  is  utilized  now  in  lieu  of  the  freight  shipments  which 
were  made  prior  to  the  inauguration  of  the  space  system. 

Question.  And  that  has  resulted  in  the  release  of  the 
freight  cars  to  the  company? 

Answer.  It  has. 

Mr.  Stewart.  I  should  say,  Mr.  Examiner,  I  do  not 
know  whether  it  appears  affirmatively,  that  blue-tag  matter 
is  periodical  matter,  published  less  frequently  than  once 
in  two  weeks,  and  before  the  space  system  went  into  effect, 
it  was  transported  largely  in  carload  lots,  in  fast  (freight) 
trains,  and  paid  for  at  a  reduced  rate,  under  the  weight 
system.  This  matter  originated  in  such  volume  at  different 
publishing  points  that  the  department  could  so  assemble 
it  and  ship  it  in  carload  lots.     (R.  236,  237.) 

Mr.  Brauer  testified  on  re-direct  examination  as  follows: 

Question  (by  Mr.  Stewart).  Now,  when  the  blue-tag 
mails  are  taken  out  of  the  freight  cars  moving  eastward, 
for  instance,  corresponding  to  your  experience,  and  are 
now,  under  the  present  system,  accommodated  in  the 
return  movement  of  storage  cars,  you  intended  to  say  merely, 
as  I  take  it,  that  no  additional  revenues  are  paid  to  the 
railroad  companies  for  that  movement  beyond  that  which 
they  ah-eady  receive  for  the  full  car  movement;  is  that  right  ? 

Answer.  That  is  right. 

Question.  At  the  full  rate  ? 

Answer.  That  is  right. 

Question.  And  if  these  mails  were  not  placed  in  these 
empty  cars,  and  so  transported  in  that  manner,  the  depart- 
ment would  pay  for  the  empty  movement  at  the  same  rate 
it  pays  for  the  full  movement  westbound  ? 

Answer.  That  is  correct.     (R.  247.) 

THE  CLOSE  SUPERVISION  OVER  SPACE  UNDER  THE 
WEIGHT-BASIS  SYSTEM  APPLIED  ONLY  TO  THE  FULL 
RAILWAY  POST  OFFICE  CARS;  UNDER  THE  SPACE- 
BASIS  SYSTEM  IT  IS  EXTENDED  TO  ALL  CLASSES  OF 

UNITS. 

Mr.  Gaines  testified  on  direct  examination  as  foUows: 

Question  (by  Mr.  Stewart)  .     With  regard  to  supervision, 

the  examiner  asked  you  about  tliat,  and  I  will  ask  you 

whether  or  not  you  had  the  same  supervision  of  the  full 

cars  and  exercised  it,  as  under  the  space  system,  and  whether 


188 

there  is  any  difference  between  that  and  what  is  known 
as  the  closed-pouch  and  storage  mails. 

Answer.  The  supervision  of  the  service  in  the  full  cars, 
for  which  the  department  was  paying,  was  very  close; 
indeed,  so  close  that  I  will  say  that  we  did  not,  under  the 
space  basis  release  a  single  one  of  the  full  railway  post- 
office  cars  for  which  we  were  paying.  That  supervision 
was  extremely  necessary  then,  as  it  is  now,  in  order  that 
the  department  would  not  pay  for  railroad  post-office  space 
that  was  not  needed. 


Mr.  Stewart.  The  supervision  that  we  have  been 
speaking  about,  this  close  supervision,  under  the  weight 
basis,  was  not  directed  toward  anything  but  the  full  cars, 
as  the  department  did  not  pay  anything  additional  for  the 
apartment  cars. 

The  Witness.  The  apartment  cars. 

Mr.  Stewart.  Nor  for  storage  space.     (R.  130,  131.) 

CLOSER   SUPERVISION  AND  RELEASE    OF    EQUIPMENT 
UNDER  THE  SPACE  BASIS- SYSTEM. 

Mr.  Gaines  testified  on  direct  examination  as  follows: 

Question  (by  Mr.  Stewart).  You  spoke  of  the  closer 
supervision  which  the  service  receives  under  the  space 
system  from  the  officers  in  the  field.  What  effect,  stated 
specifically,  has  that  upon  railroad  equipment? 

Answer.  It  has  had  the  effect  of  releasing  a  considerable 
amount  of  railroad  equipment  for  other  purposes. 

Question.  What  effect  has  it  had  upon  the  space  m 
units  of  less  than  40  feet,  so  far  as  the  Railway  Post  Office 
Service  is  concerned,  where  the  department  might  dis- 
pense with  such  service  without  detriment  to  the  public 
interest  ? 

Answer.  That  has  been  eliminated. 

Question.  Is  that  tendency  under  the  space  system  a 
pronounced  one  or  not  ? 

Answer.  It  is  pronounced.     (R.  115,  116.) 

SPACE  BASIS  RESULTS  IN  ECONOMY  IN  CAR  EQUIPMENT. 

Mr.  Stone  testified  on  re-direct  examination  as  follows: 
Questior  (by  Mr.  Stewart).  Mr.  Stone,  referring  to  the 
advantages  of"  the  space  system  over  the  weight  system,  I 
want  to  direct  your  attention  to  this  feature,  and  ask 
your  opinion  as  to  whether  or  not  it  results  economically 
to  the  department  and  the  railroads  as  well  in  restrictmg 


189 

the  use  of  equipment  and  o]->eration  to  the  needs  of  the 
service  as  actually  performed  ? 

*  *  *  *  * 

Answer.  Yes;  of  course,  the  space  woukl  be  adjusted  to 
the  needs  more  nearly  than  under  the  ^yeight  system. 
(R.  393,  394.) 

THE  RELATION  BETWEEN  THE  DEVELOPMENT  OF  THE 
TERMINAL  RAILWAY  POST  OFFICES  AND  THE  ECO- 
NOMICAL USE  OF  TRAIN- SPACE  AND  ECONOMIES  IN 
THE  RAILWAY  MAIL  SERVICE. 

^Ir.  Gaixes  testified  on  direct  examination  as  follows: 

Question  (by  Mr.  Stewart).  *  *  *  "Will  you  de- 
scribe briefl}^  the  advantages  that  hare  growai  out  of  the 
space  system  with  respect  to  the  utilization  of  what  are 
known  as  the  railway  post  office  terminals  ? 

Answer.  We  are  requiring  the  parcels  post  and,  m  many 
cases,  ordinary  paper  mail,  to  be  distributed  in  the  termi- 
nals and  sent  out  made  up  into  "directs,"  to  an  extent 
that  we  never  have  before.  We  are  not  delaying  in  the 
terminals  any  lirst-class  mail,  although  we  are  performuig 
advanced  distri])Ution  there  of  any  mail  that  can  be  worked 
on  dead  time.  That  is  relieving  the  force  on  the  Imes  of 
an  immense  amount  of  distribution  and  making  it  possi- 
ble to  reduce  the  number  of  clerks  in  service  on  lines  where 
mail  formerly  was  distributed  in  those  railway  post  offices, 
where  it  can  be  distributed,  without  impairmg  the  efficiency 
of  the  service,  in  terminals. 

Question.  Has  it  or  has  it  not  developed  the  usefulness 
of  the  terminal  railway  post  offices  to  a  greater  degree  than 
under  the  old  sj^stem  ? 

Answer.  It  has. 

Question.  The  railway  post  offices  are  an  institution 
which  existed  before  the  space  system,  did  they  not  ? 

Answer.  They  did. 

Question.  And  they  had  certain  functions  to  perform  with 
reference  to  mails  in  transit  ? 

Answer.  Yes,  sir. 

Question.  And  I  understood  you  to  say  that  the  space 
system  has  enabled  the  develo]>mert  of  those  functions  to 
a  greater  degree  of  usefulness  ? 

Answer.  Of  course,  Mr.  Stewart,  the  development  could 
have  been  made  under  the  weight  or  any  other  system,  but 
there  is  a  greater  incentive  now  to  distribute  mails  in  the 
terminals  than  there  was  under  the  weight  basis.  There 
are  more  opportunities  for  relievuig  not  only  forces  on  the 
lines,  but  space  that  would  otherwise  ha>e  to  be  paid  for 


190 

nnd  thnt  can  be  released  to  the  railroad  companies  for  other 

use. 

***** 

Question.  What  effect,  if  any,  has  the  conduct  of  the 
service  under  the  space  system  had  upon  the  number  of 
"directs"?  Has  it  increased  them  or  reduced  them,  on 
the  whole  ? 

Answer.  It  has  increased. 

Question.  And  what  effect  has  that  had  upon  the  working 
in  the  cars? 

Answer.  Without  materially  reducing  the  distribution  on 
the  train. 

Question.  It  relieves  the  clerks  of  that  much  labor? 

Answer.  It  relieves  the  clerks  of  labor  and  makes  it 
possible,  in  many  cases,  for  us  to  withdraw  a  part  of  the 
force  on  the  railway  post  office  lines. 

Question.  Does  it  also  enable  you  to  dispense  with  work- 
ing space  and  utilize  storage  space  for  the  transmission  of 
those  mails  ? 

Answer.  It  does;  and  I  believe  it  might  be  well  to  point 
out  now  that  it  takes  a  great  deal  more  space  to  carry  work- 
ing mail  and  distribute  it  on  the  trains  than  it  does  to  carry 
the  same  amount  of  mail  after  it  has  been  distributed. 
*     *     *       (R.  122-125.) 

UNDER  SPACE-BASIS  SYSTEM  THE  RAILROADS  HAVE  AN 
INCENTIVE  TO  MAKE  AND  MAINTAIN  GOOD  MAIL 
TRAIN  SCHEDULES. 

Mr.  Gaines  testified  on  direct  examination  as  follows: 

Question  (by  Mr.  Stewart).  Now,  with  reference  to 
railroad  service  and  schedules,  what,  if  any,  effect  has 
the  change  made  upon  their  relation  to  the  mail  service  ? 

*  H«  *  *  * 

Answer.  Well,  they  have  the  incentive  now  that  they 
never  had   before   to   not   only  make,   but   to  maintain 

schedules. 

***** 

They  have  that  incentive  all  the  time  which  they  had 
during  the  weighing  period,  under  the  weight  basis.  I  am 
not  saying  that  the  railroad  companies  would  make 
schedules  especially  for  the  weight  period,  but,  at  the  same 
time,  they  have  that  same  incentive  now  to  not  only  make, 
but  to  maintain  schedules,  for  the  ])urpose  of  getting  the 
compensation  from  the  department  ^or  the  handling  of 
the  mails.      (R.  131,  132.) 


191 

CLOSER  SUPERVISION  BY  THE  RAILWAY  MAIL  SERVICE 
UNDER  SPACE-BASIS  SYSTEM,  AND  BENEFICIAL 
EFFECTS  ON  PERSONNEL. 

Mr.  Gaines  testified  on  direct  examination  as  follows: 

Question  (by  Mr.  Stewart).  When  you  s]5eak  of  the 
general  supervision.  Mr.  Gaines,  which  is  now  given  the 
service,  is  it  to  be  understood  that  that  refers  to  not  only 
the  superintendent,  but  to  all  of  the  subordinate  officers  in 
the  division — chief  clerks,  transfer  clerks,  and  others? 

Answer.  It  relates  more  particularly  to  the  chief  clerks 
and  transfer  clerks,  really,  than  it  does  to  the  superin- 
tendent. 

Question.  Now,  what  reciprocal  advantage  is  that  to 
the  personnel  of  the  service?  Does  it  give  3'ou  a  more 
efficient  staff  or  otherwise?  Does  it  increase  their  effi- 
ciencv  generally  ? 

Answer.  It  increases  their  value  to  the  service  and  their 
knowledge  of  the  service,  and  therefore  I  consider  their 
efficiency.     (R,  136.) 

Mr.  Gaixes  testified  on  re-direct  examination  that  the 
space  system  had  resulted  in  very  httle  additional  cost  for 
supervision,  as  follows: 

Question  (by  Mr.  Stewart).  *  *  *  With  reference 
to  what  vou  said  regarding  supervision  of  the  service  and 
the  cost  of  it,  I  will  ask  you  whether  it  is  not  true  that 
the  main  part  of  the  suj^ervision  wliich  we  have  referred 
to  in  the  testimony  is  carried  on  and  made  by  the  regular 
officers  of  the  Railway  Mail  Service,  who  were  theretofore 
emploved  under  the  weight  basis  ? 

Answer.  It  is.  We  have  not  increased  our  force  of 
chief  clerks.  We  have  increased  to  a  certain  extent  the 
clerical  force  in  the  su])erintendents'  offices  and  chief 
clerks'  offices,  possibly  one  man  to  each  district,  and  \ve 
have  made  some  increases  in  the  supervisory  forces  in 
terminal  railway  post  offices  and  transfer  offices;  but 
without  going  into  the  matter  from  the  records,  I  am  of 
the  o])inion  that  the  total  amount  would  not  exceed, 
during  the  four-year  period,  what  the  taking  of  the  weights 
at  the  quadrennial  period  would  cost. 

Question.  Well,  do  you  think  it  would  even  approximate 
that? 

Answer.  I  do  not  think  so.  I  am  not  in  ])Ossession  of 
information  as  to  the  cost  in  the  department  now,  after 
the  division  has  gotten  through  with  tliis  part  of  the  work, 
and  has  sent  the  figures  in  here  for  tabulation,  but  I  would 
say  that  there  was  a  very  great  difference  in  favor  of  the 
cost  under  the  space  basis.     (K.  226,  227.) 


192 

UNDER  SPACE-BASIS  SYSTEM  POSTAL  CLERKS  TAKE 
GREATER  INTEREST  IN  ECONOMIZING  SPACE. 

Mr.  Gaines  testified  on  direct  examination  as  follows: 

Question  (by  Mr.  Stewart).  What  difference,  if  any,  is 
there  with  reference  to  the  interest  which  the  railway  ])Ostal 
clerks  take  in  the  service  in  that  regard  for  handling  and 
sorting  of  the  mail  ^ 

Answer.  We  find,  as  a  rule,  that  the  postal  clerks  are 
attempting  to  carry  out  the  wishes  of  the  department  in 
regard  to  handling  mail  in  their  cars  to  a  ])rac  tic  able 
extent. 

Question.  Did  they  have  any  such  interest  under  the 
weight  system  ? 

Answer.  They  did  not  appear  to  feel  that  in  man}'  cases 
it  was  necessary  for  them  to  carry  in  the  mail  cars  any- 
thing except  the  working  mail  and  mail  for  local  dispatch, 
dispatch  to  local  stations,  and,  as  I  stated  before,  they 
sent  back  considerable  quantities  of  mail  to  be  handled 
in  the  baggage  cars,  which,  to  an  extent,  was  found  not 
necessary.  I  believe  the  clerks  now  realize — we  have 
tried  to  impress  them,  at  any  rate,  with  the  fact — that, 
as  agents  of  the  Post  Office  Department,  it  was  their 
duty  to  assist  in  economical  handling  of  the  mail  and  to 
carry  out  the  rules  in  regard  to  taking  as  much  as  possible 
into'  their  cars,  where  not  only  it  is  handled  without 
undue  expense  to  the  department,  but  where  it  is  under 
the  direct  supervision  of  a  representative  of  the  Post 
Office  Department.     (R.  121,  122.) 

THE  SPACE-BASIS  SYSTEM  HAS  REDUCED  THE  NECES- 
SITY FOR  THE  NUMBER  OF  RAILWAY  POST-OFFICE 
CLERKS  ON  THE  LINES  WHICH  WOULD  OTHERWISE  BE 
REQUIRED  UNDER  THE  WEIGHT-BASIS  SYSTEM. 

Mr.  Gaines  testified  on  direct  examination  as  foUows: 
Question  (by  Mr.  Stewart)  .  I  believe  you  testified  that 
the  general  effect  of  the  space  system  and  the  development 
of  other  related  service  has  been  to  reduce  the  necessity 
for  clerks  on  the  fines — that  is,  to  reduce  the  number  of 
clerks  ? 

Answer.  We  have  reduced  the  number  of  clerks;  one  of 
the  factors,  as  stated  before,  being  the  distribution  of  mail 
in  terminals  and  in  large  post  offices,  withdrawing  circular 
matter  from  distribution  on  the  trains,  and  because  of  the 
very  close  supervision  that  our  men  are  giving  to  the  needs 
of  the  service.     (R.  133,  134.) 


193 

COST  OF  SUPERVISION  LESS  UNDER  SPACE-BASIS  SYS- 
TEM THAN  WEIGHING  UNDER  WEIGHT-BASIS  SYS- 
TEM. 

Mr.  Gaines  testified  on  cross-examination  as  follows: 

Question  (by  Attorney  Examiner  Brown).  Now,  let 
me  ask  you  there  a  question  that  comes  to  my  mind.  You 
spoke  about  the  expense  of  the  weighing  every  four  years, 
and  I  believe  an  exhibit  was  introduced  showing  that 
expense.  Have  you  computed  the  expense  that  has  been 
entailed  on  the  Post  Office  Department  for  its  supervision 
of  the  space  basis,  which  you  say  is  much  more  rigid  ? 

Answer.  Well,  we  could  make  a  very  close  estimate  of 
any  additional  expense.  Do  you  misunderstand  me  in. 
regard  to  supervision?  We  always  had  supervision,  but^ 
there  was  so  much  at  stake  under  the  space  basis  that  we 
have  insisted  upon  greater  supervision,  and  unquestionably 
that  has  cost  us  more  money. 

Question.  Just  from  an  offhand  view,  do  jou  think  that 
the  increased  expense  to  you  for  supervision  under  the 
space  basis  is  comparable  with  the  expense  of  one  four- 
years'  weighing? 

Answer.  I  would  not  say  the  supervision  is  comparable- 
to  it.     It  is  not  nearly  so  great.     (R.  208,  209.) 

Referring  to  expense  of  accounting,  he  stated : 

Answer.  *  *  *  That  was  not  included  in  the  super- 
vision. That  will  cost  us  some  more  money,  but  I  still 
adhere  to  my  statement  that,  in  my  judgment,  the  expense 
is  not  nearly  so  great,  from  the  standpoint  of  accounting,  as 
well  as  supervision,  as  the  weighing  of  the  mails.     (R.  209.) 

THE  SPACE-BASIS  SYSTEM  HAS  ELIMINATED  CONSIDER- 
ABLE COST  INCIDENT  TO  THE  WEIGHING  OF  THE 
MAILS. 

Mr.  Gaines  testified  on  direct  examination  as  follows: 

Question  (by  Mr.  Stewart)  .  Will  you  state  what  effect 
the  elimination  of  the  weighing  has  had  upon  the  labor 
and  the  cost  of  labor  for  mail  weighers  and  railway  dos<^- 
office  clerks  in  your  section  ? 

Answer.  I  have  no  definite  information  as  to  the  cost  of 
weighing  the  mails. 

Question.  We  have  that  in  general,  Mr.  Gaines.  I  am 
only  asking  you  whether  or  not  it  has. 

Answer.  It  has  eliminated  a  very  considerable  cost 
incident  to  the  weighing  of  mails  under  the  weight  basis^ 
not  only  of  weighers  on  tlie  trains,  l)ut  of  clerical  forces  in 
the  offices,  in  the  way  of  assembling  the  weight  data. 
(R.  135,  1.36.) 

122698—19 13 


194 

CONSOLIDATION  OF  DISPATCHES  BY  TRAINS  HAS  RE- 
DUCED THE  NUMBER  OF  TRIPS  BETWEEN  RAILROAD 
STATIONS  AND  POST  OFFICES. 

Mr.  Gaines  testified  on  direct  examination  as  follows: 

Question  (by  Mr.  Stewart).  What  effect  has  the  con- 
solidation of  the  mails  had  upon  the  number  of  dispatches 
between  the  post  office  and  the  railroad  trains  ? 

Answer.  It  has  reduced  them  wherever  closed  pouch 
service  has  been  eliminated  from  any  train.  As  I  stated 
some  time  ago,  the  train  service  in  the  eleventh  division  is 
not  so  excessive  that  we  had  any  considerable  number  of 
pouch  exchanges  which  I  found  it  proper  to  eliminate. 

Question.  But  to  that  extent,  it  has  reduced  the  number 
of  trips  between  the  trains  and  the  post  offices  ? 

Answer.  It  has,  to  the  extent  that  we  have  discontinued 
or  reduced  the  service.     (R.  135.) 

Mr.  Brauer  testified  on  direct  examination  as  follows: 

Question  (by  Mr.  Stewart)  .  You  heard  the  testimony 
of  Mr.  Gaines  in  regard  to  the  side  and  terminal  service.  I 
wiU  ask  you  if  you  have  anything  further  to  say  upon  that 
point,  as  to  whether  or  not  the  space  system  has  reduced 
the  work  required  of  the  railroad  companies'  employees  ? 

Answer.  So  far  as  my  division  is  concerned,  it  is  just 
about  the  same. 

Question.  Are  you  familiar  with  conditions  throughout 
the  country  in  that  respect  ? 

Answer.  Well,  I  was  very  well  acquainted  with  them 
around  Chicago,  quite  well  acquainted  with  them,  and  as 
far  as  the  suburban  district  around  Chicago  is  concerned 
there  has  been  a  very  large  and  material  reduction  in  side 
service.     (R.  237,  238.) 

STANDARDIZATION  OF  CAR  UNITS  UNDER  THE  SPACE- 
BASIS  SYSTEM,  AND  ITS  ADVANTAGES. 

Mr.  Gaines  testified  on  direct  exammation  as  follows: 
Question  (by  Mr.  Stewart)  .  Now,  with  special  reference 
to  the  equipment  which  the  railroads  furnish  for  the 
service,  will  you  state  the  main  difference  between  what 
is  now  required  in  the  sizes  of  cars  as  compared  with 
what  were  called  for  under  the  weight  basis  ?  I  refer  now 
particularly  to  the  apartment  car  service,  the  small  apart- 
ment. 

Answer.  Well,  we  have  definite  units  now  and  standard 
cars  of  15,  30,  and  60  feet  in  length.  Under  the  weight 
basis,  we  would  ask  for  cars  on  the  very  small  lines  any- 


195 

where  from  10  to  15  feet,  and  then  we  had  20-foot  cars, 
25-foot  cars,  30,  40,  50,  and  60  foot  cars. 

Question.  Does  this  standardization  of  the  working  car 
to  the  60,  30,  and  15  foot  units  result  in  any  advantage  to 
the  department,  so  far  as  distributing  space  is  concerned — 
in  other  words,  do  you  get  a  better  distributmg  facilit}'  in 
those  standard  cars  than  m  the  many  sized  cars  which  were 
furnished  before  ? 

.\nswer.  The  standardization  of  the  cars  is  greatly  to  the 
advantage,  in  my  judgment,  not  only  to  the  department 
but  to  the  railroad  company.  It  is  true  that  at  one  time 
cars  were  built  and  equipped  almost  without  reference  to 
standard.  They  represented  m  many  instances  the  indi- 
vidual ideas  of  the  officials  of  the  division  where  they  were 
phiced  in  service.     (R.  119,  120.) 

COOPERATION  OF  RAILROADS  WITH  DEPARTMENT  IN 
EFFECTING  READJUSTMENTS  OF  SERVICE  BETTER 
UNDER  SPACE-BA.SIS  SYSTEM  THAN  UNDER  WEIGHT- 
BASIS  SYSTEM. 

Mr.  Gaines  testified  on  direct  examination  as  follows: 

Question  (by  Mr.  Stewart)  .  Now,  in  making  those  read- 
justments of  the  mail  service,  both  to  the  needs  of  the 
railroad  companies  and  to  the  needs  of  the  public,  in  an 
economical  administration  for  both  parties,  what  do  you 
find  the  attitude  of  the  railroad  officials  to  be  ?  Is  it  one 
of  willing  cooperation  to  an  extent  greater  than  under  the 
weight  system;  and  if  so,  for  what  reason? 

Answer.  I  do  not  know,  Mr.  Stewart,  that  I  exactly 
understand  that  question.  Now,  do  you  mean,  do  we 
find  a  complete  spirit  of  cooperation  m  regard  to  the  hand- 
ling of  the  service  as  a  whole  ? 

Question.  I  refer  particularly  to  the  attitude  generally, 
and  not  to  specific  cases,  where  some  agent  of  the  railroad 
company  has  personally  offered  objections.  "VMiat  I  am 
referrmg  to  particularly  now  is  this:  Do  you  find  that, 
because  the  railroad  company  received  specific  pay  for  a 
specific  authorization 

^\nswer.  I  understand  the  question  now. 

Question  (continuing).  There  is  a  greater  tendency  to 
comply  with  the  requirement  of  the  department  than 
under  the  weight  basis  where  they  did  not  receive  such 
pay  ? 

Answer.  There  certainly  is,  because  we  are  not  gomg  to 
the  railroad  companies,  as  we  had  to  do,  under  the  space 
basis.  For  instance,  when  we  find  a  line  of  30-foot  cars 
necessary,  we  had  to  go  to  the  railroad  companies  then 


196 

and  ask  thorn  if  they  would  put  on  a  line  of  30-foot  cars. 
We  could  not  offer' them  any  inducements  to  go  to  the 
expense,  possibly,  of  building  cars  and  putting  them  on 
the  run.  Now  we  have  a  defuiit(».  business  proposition 
to  submit.  Tliey  know  what  service  is  expected  of  them, 
and  they  know  what  the  compensation  will  be. 

Question.  You  mean  you  get  this  ready  compliance 
under  the  space  system  ? 

Answer.  Under  the  space  system. 

Question.  And  not  under  the  weight  system? 

Answer.  Not  under  the  weight  system — not  always 
under  the  weight  system. 

Question.  Have  you  ever  had  experience  under  the 
weight  system  where  the  cars  were  not  furnished  promptly? 

Answer.  Yes,  sir. 

Question.  Do  you  remember  the  length  of  time  that 
intervened  between  the  time  the  requisitions  were  made 
and  when  compliance  was  made  ? 

Answer.  I  can  not  remember  the  exact  time,  but  in  one 
instance  certain  services  that  we  were  desirous  of  having 
involved  the  handling  of  30-foot  cars,  and  that  was  pend- 
ing for  considerably  more  than  one  year,  and  was  adjusted 
soon  after  the  space  basis  was  put  into  effect.  In  another 
instance,  on  something  over  300  miles  of  track,  where  we 
desired  double-daily  service,  and  needed  it  badly,  we  were 
unable  to  secure  the  cars  under  the  weight  basis  for  a 
period  of  more  than  a  year.     (K.  117-119.) 

MAIL  CABS  ARE  RELEASED  IMMEDIATELY  AFTER 
REACHING  TERMINI;  THERE  IS  NOTHING  IN  THE 
MAIL  SERVICE  ANALOGOUS  TO  THE  WAREHOUSE 
OR  RECONSIGNMENT  PRIVILEGES;  THERE  IS  NO 
SHORTAGE  OF  CARS  AS  A  RESULT  OF  INADEQUATE 
TERMINAL   FACILITIES. 

Mr.  Gaines  testified  on  direct  examination  as  follows : 

Question  (by  Mr.  Stewart)  .  With  respect  to  the  ability 
to  command  sufficient  railroad  equipment  for  the  trans- 
portation of  the  mails,  I  will  ask  you  whether  any  of  the 
general  causes  for  shortage  in  freight  cars,  for  instance, 
applies  to  the  mail  service  ? 

Answer.  Freight  cars  ? 

Question.  Freight  cars.  For  instance,  are  mail  cars 
held  in  transit  at  points  to  any  great  extent,  or  are  they 
released  quickly  ? 

Answer.  They  are  released.  Oh,  I  understand  the 
question  now,  I  believe.  Mail  cars  for  mail  service  pur- 
poses are  released  immediately  after  reaching  the  termmus 


197 

of  the  run.  They  are  used  to  a  Umited  extent  for  advance 
distribution.  That  is  the  only  case  in  which  we  have  any 
occasion  to  retain  the  distributing  cars. 

Question.  There  is  no  such  thing  known  in  the  mail 
service  as  the  warehouse  privilege,  for  instance,  the  hold- 
ing of  cars  with  mails  in  them,  as  obtains  in  the  freight 
service  ? 

Answer.  No. 

Question.  Nor  any  reconsignment  privilege  ? 

Answer.  Nothing  of  that  kind. 

Question.  There  is  never  a  shortage  of  cars  by  reason  of 
inadequate  terminal  facilities  ? 

Answer.  Not  so  far  as  it  relates  to  the  railroad  mail 
service. 

Question.  That  is  what  I  am  inquiring  about.  The 
demand  for  cars  is  not  influenced  by  commercial  methods 
or  bimching  of  traffic  as  it  is  in  freight  ? 

Answer.  It  is  not.     (R.  136,  137.) 

THERE  HAVE  BEEN  NO  COMPLAINTS  FROM  THE  PUBLIC 
AS  TO  CHANGES  IN  SERVICE  UNDER  SPACE-BASIS 
SYSTEM  EXCEPT  A  FEW  WHERE  CLOSED-POUCH 
SERVICE  HAS  SUPERSEDED  APARTMENT -CAR 
SERVICE. 

In  answer  to  Attorney  Examiner  Brown's  question  as  to 
whether  there  has  been  complamt  from  the  public  as  to 
reduction  in  car  units,  Mr.  Gaixes  stated: 

Answer.  We  have  had  a  few  cases  of  complaint  that 
seemed  to  come  from  interested  parties  on  small  lines, 
where  we  had  substituted  closed-pouch  for  railway  post- 
office  service;  but  I  will  say  that  the  reduction  was  only 
made — and  I  am  only  speaking  now  for  the  eleventh 
division,  and  presume  that  this  statement  will  apply  to 
others — the  reduction  was  only  made  in  cases  where  we 
were  satisfied  that  the  efficiency  of  the  service  would  not 
be  impaired  on  account  of  the  reduction.  At  the  begin- 
ning we  had  some  complaints,  but  nothing  specific.  We 
have  asked  in  every  case  of  complaint  that  they  make 
a  specific  complaint,  so  that  they  might  be  investigated, 
and  if  there  was  any  reason  that  we  could  not  give  good 
service  we  would — well,  I  do  not  know  that  I  made  that 
promise,  but  under  instructions  from  the  department,  if 
we  could  not  give  good  service  we  were  instructed  to  not 
take  (off)  that  railway  post  ofiice  or  to  recommend  the 
putting  of  it  back  if  it  was  taken  off.     (R.  210.) 


198 

Mr.  Gaines  testified  on  re-direct  examination  that  there 
have  been  no  complaints  from  the  pubhc  as  to  changes 
in  service  other  than  the  few  cases  where  closed-pouch 
service  was  substituted  for  apartment-car  service,  as 
follows : 

Question  (by  Mr.  Stewart).  You  referred  in  your 
cross-examination  to  the  receipt  of  a  few  complaints 
m  the  cases  where  apartment  lines  were  discontinued 
and  closed-pouch  service  substituted,  and  you  explained 
the  method  of  procedure  in  those  kinds  of  cases.  I 
will  ask  you  whether  there  has  been  any  complauit 
whatever  from  the  public  with  reference  to  any  other 
changes  in  the  service,  such  as  those  affecting  the  60-foot 
cars  and  30-foot  cars,  the  60-foot  storage,  and  storage 
units,  and  so  forth. 

Answer.  None  whatever.     (R.  227.) 

SPACE-BASIS  SYSTEM  PRACTICABLE  AND 
EQUITABLE. 

SPACE-BASIS  SYSTEM,  WITH  SUCH  MODIFICATIONS  ^S 
THE  COMMISSION  MAY  DECIDE  UPON,  A  MOST  EQUI- 
TABLE AND  FAIR  MEANS  OF  COMPENSATING  THE 
COMPANIES,  AND  FAIR  TO  THE  DEPARTMENT. 

Mr.  Knox  testified  on  re-cross  examination  as  follows: 
Question  (by  Attorney  Examiner  Brown).  That  is 
to  say,  we  have  here  the  proposition  upon  the  one 
hand  that  the  Post  Office  Department  insists  that  the 
carriers  are  being  paid  under  the  present  system  at 
least  enough,  if  not  too  much,  and  we  have  the  carriers 
stating  that  they  are  being  underpaid  something  like 
$50,000,000  a  year.  Now  what  kind  of  shape  is  the  com- 
mission in  to  settle  such  a  controversy  as  that  unless  you 
practical  men  can  come  here  and  say,  in  such  a  spirit  of 
fairness  to  the  railroads  and  fairness  to  the  Government 
as  will  put  the  commission  in  the  right  mood  of  settling 
such  a  controversy  ?  Is  there  not  any  middle  proposition! 
Is  there  not  something  that  is  not  all  space  or  all  weight, 
with  the  carriers  on  one  side  demanding  weight  and  the 
Government  on  the  other  the  space?  Is  it  because  you 
are  a  representative  of  the  Government  and  the  Govern- 
ment is  rather  inclined  to  space  that  you  lend  yourself  to 
that  view  as  contradistinguished  from  the  weight  view 
which  is  insisted  upon  by  the  carrier,  or  is  that  your 
deliberate  judgment  from  your  experience  as  a  practical 


199 

man,  that  upon  the  space  basis  the  carriers  wiW.  be  ade- 
quately paid  and  the  Government  adequately  served,  and 
the  public  at  the  same  time. 

Answer.  Mr.  Examiner,  it  is  my  opinion  that  the  space 
basis,  with  any  such  modifications  as  the  commission  may 
decide  to  place  in  the  administration  of  it,  will  be  a  most 
equitable  and  fah  means  of  compensating  the  companies 
and  will  be  fair  to  the  department.  It  pays  every  day 
for  that  which  is  performed  during  any  emergency,  such 
as  Christmas.  We  pay  the  companies  for  all  the  extra 
movements  of  the  vast  quantities  of  mail,  and  any  other 
emergencies.  We  can  divert  mails  from  one  place  to 
another,  always  paying  the  company  that  has  to  handle 
the  mail.  So"^  I  think  the  space  basis,  in  my  individual 
judgment,  irrespective  of  where  I  am  employed  or  what 
the  opinion  of  the  department  is,  that  the  space  basis  is 
the  best  method  of  handling  the  mail  service.  (R.  3204- 
3206.) 

POST  OFFICE  DEPARTMENT  SHOULD  ADMINISTER  THE 
POSTAL  SERVICE,  AND  IF  A  COMMON  BASIS  OF  OPERA- 
TION SHOULD  BE  DETERMINED  UPON  BY  THE  INTER- 
STATE COMMERCE  COMMISSION  THE  DEPARTMENT 
AND  THE  RAILROADS  WOULD  BE  IN  ACCORD. 

Mr.  Searle  testified  on  re-cross  examination  as  follows: 

Question  (by  Mr.  Stewart).  Mr.  Searle,  what  is  the 
railroad's  idea  about  the  administration  of  the  Postal 
Sei-vice?  Should  it  be  administered  by  the  Post  Office 
Department  or  by  the  railroads  ? 

Answer.  I  would  say  that  it  should  be  administered  by 
the  Post  Office  Department  to  such  extent  as  will  conform 
to  reasonably  efficient  train  operation. 

Question.  And  the  only  difference  between  your  view 
as  to  administration  and  that  of  the  Post  Office  itself  ^vith 
respect  to  these  particular  and  these  general  authoriza- 
tions is  that  you  think  the  department's  orders  do  not 
conform  to  those  standards  which  you  mention  ? 

Answer.  No,  they  do  not;  no,  sir. 

Question.  You  think  they  do  not.  That  is  a  difference 
of  opinion.     That  is  the  whole  difference  ? 

Answer.  I  would  say  that  is  a  very  large  part  of  the 
difference  that  exists. 

Question.  All  these  matters  about  which  you  have 
testified 

Answer  (interposing).  They  are  minor  matters  that  will 
undoubtedly  be  straightened  out  if  the  main  evil  is  cured. 

Question.  So  that  if  the  commission  should  finally 
decide  that  the  space  basis  in  some  form  or  other  should 


200 

be  continued,  you  do  not  intend  to  say  that  it  would  not 
be  practicable  for  a  common  basis  of  operation  to  be  de- 
termined upon  between  the  railroad  companies  and  the 
department,  under  the  advice  of  the  Interstate  Commerce 
Commission,  by  which  it  could  be  administered  ? 

Answer.  ITnquestionably,  if  consideration  were  given,  as 
I  know  it  will  be  given,  by  the  commission,  to  the  condi- 
tions which  I  have  attempted  to  describe  as  to  the  diffi- 
culties we  have  in  operation  under  the  present  administra- 
tion, I  have  no  doubt  that  the  department  and  the  rail- 
roads would  be  entirely  in  accord  and  conditions  would  be 
very  much  pleasanter.     (R.  2141,  2142.) 

if  space  basis  could  be  made  a  fair  measure  of 
valu:e,  the  chief  objection  would  be  removed. 

Mr.  Fairfield,  of  the  Illinois  Central  system,  testified 
on  cross-examination  as  foUows: 

Question.  (By  Mr.  Stewart.)  *  *  *  Your  view  that 
the  space  basis  would  not  be  desirable  because  it  would 
not  adequately  pay  you  appears  to  be  based  upon  your 
theory  that  your  pay  must  be  computed  upon  ascertained 
weight.     Is  that  it  ? 

Answer.  That  is  my  belief.  That  is,  that  the  weight  is 
the  only  proper  measure  of  pay. 

Question.  ReaUy  your  view  is  this,  that  nothing  but 
weight  is  a  fair  measure  of  that  value  ? 

Answer.  Yes,  sir. 

Question.  So  that  if,  as  a  matter  of  fact,  it  were  deter- 
mined that  space  could  be  made  a  fair  measure  of  value 
your  objection  to  the  space  basis  would  be  removed  ? 

Answer.  If  it  could.  I  don't  think  it  could.  I  don't  see 
how  it  is  possible  to  ascertain  it. 

Question.  Then  you  have  other  objections?  I  under- 
stood you  to  say  that  was  your  objection. 

Answer.  That  is  the  principal  objection.  That  is  the 
chief  objection. 

Question.  Very  well.  If  that  could  be  done,  then,  it 
would  remove  the  chief  objection? 

Answer.  If  it  could  be  done;  yes,  sir.     (R.  2350,  2351.) 


201 
SPACE-BASIS  SYSTEM  SATISFACTORY. 

THE  SPACE-BASIS  SYSTEM  HAS  OPERATED  ENTIRELY 
SATISFACTORILY  TO  THE  GOVERNMENT  AND  MORE 
SATISFACTORILY  THAN  THE  WEIGHT-BASIS  SYSTEM. 

Mr.  Stone  testified  on  direct  examination  as  follows: 

Question  (by  Attorney  Examiner  Brown)  .  WeU,  you 
have  had,  in  a  general  way,  supervision,  as  assistant  general 
superintendent,  of  the  operation  of  the  Railway  Mail  Service 
under  the  space  system  ? 

Answer.  Yes. 

Question.  Has  it  operated  satisfactorily  to  the  Govern- 
ment ? 

Answer.  Entirely  so. 

Question.  Had  it  operated  more  satisfactorily  than  the 
weight  basis  ? 

Answer,  I  think  it  has. 

Question.  What  are  your  reasons  for  that  ? 

Answer.  It  charges  to  each  item  of  service  its  proportion- 
ate part  of  the  cost.  Under  the  weight  system,  there  was 
just  a  weighing  for  a  statistical  period  of  105  days  once  in 
four  years,  and  thereafter  there  was  no  allowance  made 
for  any  increases  or  decreases,  with  certain  exceptions, 
but  that  was  the  general  rule.  Consequently,  whenever 
there  was  an  application  for  additional  service,  the  tend- 
ency was  to  establish  it,  because  the  operation  of  an 
additional  apartment  car  was  not  specifically  paid  for  by 
the  department.  It  was  largely  a  matter  of  the  total  cost 
for  the  distribution  in  the  car.  Also,  if  there  was  an 
application  for  additional  closed-pouch  service,  it  would  be 
very  likely  put  on,  because  there  was  no  specific  cost 
for  that  additional  service.  Now,  when  there  is  any 
application  or  proposition  to  establish  service,  we  can  ascer- 
tain what  the  exact  cost  for  each  unit  of  the  service  would 
be,  and  are  able  to  form  a  better  opinion  as  to  the  advisa- 
bility of  establishing  such  service.     (R.  360,  361.) 

RAILROADS  HAVE  NO  PARTICULAR  KICK  UNDER  SPACE- 
BASIS  SYSTEM  AS  DISTINGUISHED  FROM  WEIGHT- 
BASIS  SYSTEM. 

Mr.  Knox  testified  on  cross-examination  as  follows: 

Question  (by  Attorney  Examiner  Brown).  Now,  you 
are  the  division  superintendent  out  here  in  the  Northwest, 
as  I  understand  it  ? 

Answer.  Yes,  sir. 

Question.  What  kick  have  the  railroad  companies — 
I  am  using  the  common  ordinary  expression,  because  I  want 


202 

to  know  what  they  put  up  to  you  about  this  service — 
what  kick  do  they  put  up  to  you  as  distinguished  from  the 
weight  basis  that  they  had  in  prior  to  that  time  ? 

Answer.  Well,  I  have  not  anj'thing  in  my  files  to  indicate 
any  particular  kick. 

Question.  You  have  not  heard  anything? 

Answer.  Nothing  of  that  sort.     (R.  3074,  3075.) 

NO  EVIDENCE  THAT  THE  RAILROADS'  PREDICTION  HAS 
BEEN  VERIFIED  THAT  LARGE  AMOUNT  OF  EXPRESS 
AND  FREIGHT  WOULD  BE  DIVERTED  FROM  THE 
ROADS  AS  A  RESULT  OF  THE  SPACE-BASIS  SYSTEM. 

Mr.  WoRTHiNGTON,  vicc  president  Southern  Pacific  Co., 
testified  on  cross-examination  as  follows : 

Question  (by  Mr.  Stewart).  You  stated  that  the  parcel 
post  is  in  direct  competition  with  the  express  and  freight, 
and  I  uifer  from  your  answers  that  you  believe  there  has 
been  or  will  be  a  large  diversion  of  your  express  and  freight 
to  parcel  post.     Have  you  any  evidence  of  that  fact  ? 

Answer.  I  think  there  has  been  a  diversion  already. 

Question.  Speaking  of  a  very  large  diversion,  Mr.  Worth- 
ington  ? 

Answer.  Well,  the  diversion  of  matter  from  the  express 
to  the  parcel  post,  I  should  think,  would  naturall}^,  to  a 
certain  extent,  depend  on  the  rate  charged  for  each,  and 
the  services  rendered.  If  one  rate  was  lower  than  the 
other  between  two  given  points  or  the  service  was  better, 
wh}^  the  people  of  the  country  would  probably  favor  that 
service;  and,  outside  of  the  diversion,  there  is  always  a 
natural  growth  in  all  kinds  of  service. 

Question.  Do  you  know  that  the  claim  was  made  before 
the  congressional  committee  that  if  the  space  basis  were 
authorized  it  would  result  in  diverting  your  freight  business 
to  the  mails  to  a  very  large  extent  on  certain  lines  ? 

Answer.  If  what  service  was  authorized — the  space 
basis  ? 

Question.  The  space  basis  system. 

Answer.  I  think  we  probably  stated  that  as  a  poten- 
tiality. I  do  not  think  that  anybody  could  state  as  an 
absolute  fact  that  that  would  be  the  effect  unless  he  knew 
that  the  rate  would  be  such  as  to  cause  the  diversion.  It 
is  always  a  potentiality. 

Question.  You  do  not  know  that  that  has  eventuated, 
do  you  ? 

Answer.  I  don't  know  to  what  extent  there  has  been  a 
diversion  of  matter  from  freight  to  the  parcel  post.  I  have 
not  any  statistics  on  that  point. 


203 

Question.  Well,  you  are  quite  sure,  are  you  not,  that  the 
effect  is  not  great  ? 

Answer.  No,  su',  I  am  not  sure  at  all  on  that  point.  I 
don't  know. 

Question.  Can  you  give  me  any  instance  where  it  has 
occurred  ? 

Answer.  No,  sir.  I  have  not  any  figures  on  it  or  any 
information  here  that  I  could  give  you.     (R.  16153/^,  1616.) 

OPERATION  OF  SERVICE  SUBSTANTIALLY  THE 
SAME  ON  NOVEMBER  1,  1916,  UNDER  SPACE- 
BASIS  SYSTEM  AS  THERETOFORE  UNDER 
WEIGHT-BASIS  SYSTEM;  AND  READJUSTMENT 
THEREAFTER  WAS  MADE  AS  SOON  AS  DEFINITE 
MEASURE  OF  SERVICE  WAS  ASCERTAINED. 

SPACE  AUTHORIZATIONS  ON  NOVEMBER  1,  1916,  FAR  IN 
EXCESS  OF  NEEDS  OF  SERVICE  AND  SUBSEQUENT 
REDUCTIONS  WERE  MADE  AS  SOON  AS  DEFINITE 
MEASURE  OF  SERVICE  WAS  SECURED. 

Mr.  Knox  on  cross-examination  testified  as  follows: 

Question  (by  Mr.  Wood)  .  Now,  Mr.  Knox,  in  connection 
with  yom-  own  authorizations,  I  was  very  much  interested 
in  the  manner  in  which  you  described  the  care  with  which 
these  authorizations  were  made,  after  careful  investigation, 
and  you  described  in  some  considerable  detail  what  was 
necessary  before  an  mcrease  in  the  authorization  would 
be  made.  Now  as  a  matter  of  fact,  as  compared  with 
November  1,  1916,  the  authorizations  throughout  the 
country  have  been  very  greatly  decreased,  have  they  not  ? 

Answer.  I  think  they  have,  yes. 

Question.  So  that  if"  anything  represents  nornial  it  is  a 
decrease  and  not  an  increase  in  the  space  authorized  ? 

Answer.  The  space  authorized  November  1,  1916,  was 
far  in  excess  of  the  needs  of  the  service.  It  was  authorized 
by  division  superintendents  or  on  their  recommendations 
after  a  very  short  time  for  prehminary  investigation  after 
the  law  passed.  The  superintendents,  I  presume — at  least 
I  did — authorized  more  space  or  recommended  more  space 
than  was  actually  needed.  We  felt  sure  about  it.  As 
soon  thereafter  as  we  could  get  a  definite  measure  of  the 
mails  handled  in  each  unit  we  reduced  those  authorizations 
to  accommodate  the  mails,  and  also  took  oflf  service  on 
trains  where  it  was  before  in  effect,  which  service  was  of  no 
particular  value.  That  represents  not  a  great  measure  or 
amount  of  the  authorizations  in  the  field.     (R.  3108,  3109.) 


•204 

OPERATION  OF  SERVICE  SUBSTANTIALLY  THE  SAME  ON 
NOVEMBER  1,1916,  UNDER  THE  SPACE-BASIS  SYSTEM 
AS  IT  WAS  ON  OCTOBER  31,  1916,  UNDER  THE  WEIGHT- 
BASIS  SYSTEM,  AND  SUBSEQUENT  CHANGES  WERE 
MADE  TO  ADJUST  THE  AUTHORIZATIONS  TO  THE 
NEEDS  OF  THE  SERVICE. 

Mr.  Searle  testified  on  cross-examination  as  follows: 

Question  (by  Mr.  Stewart).  Aside  from  the  restate- 
ment in  that  manner,  where  the  department  would  raise 
the  unit  to  60  feet,  where  the  unit  was  below  it  and  it  could 
not  be  stated  at  30,  and  the  other  changes  you  mentioned, 
where  it  might  have  lowered  the  unit,  the  operation  was 
exactly  the  same  on  the  1st  of  November  as  it  was  on  the 
31st  of  October? 

Answer.  Necessarily  it  had  to  be. 

Question.  It  had  continued  long  before  that  in  the  same 
manner  under  the  weight  basis  ? 

Answer.  Not  j^erhaps  in  identically  the  same  manner. 

Question.  But  substantially? 

Answer.  Substantially;  yes,  sir. 

Question.  After  the  1st  of  November  it  continued — the 
operation  I  am  now  speaking  of — continued  in  the  same 
manner  ? 

Answer.  Practically;  yes,  sir. 

Question.  And  the  changes  made  after  the  1st  of  Novem- 
ber were  changes  which  the  department  made  in  authoriza- 
tions to  bring  the  units  of  space  more  nearly  in  accordance, 
or  in  accord,  with  the  needs  of  the  service  as  the  depart- 
ment viewed  it?     Is  that  right? 

Answer.  I  do  not  know  what  the  needs  of  the  depart- 
ment were. 

Question.  As  the  department  viewed  it  ? 

Answer.  Undoubtedly  that  was  from  their  viewpoint. 
(R.  2126,  2127.) 

REDUCTIONS  IN  AUTHORIZATIONS  MADE  BY  DEPART- 
MENT IN  ORDER  TO  ADJUST  THE  SPACE  TO  THE 
NEEDS   OF  THE    SERVICE. 

Mr.  Searle  testified  on  cross-examination  as  follows: 
Question  (by  Mr.  Stewart)  .  You  recited  in  a  general  way 
t  e  reduction  of  these  units  of  service  represented  by  the 
sizes  of  cars  below  the  authorizations  that  existed  before 
the  space  basis  became  effective.  Whatever  may  be  your 
views  a])0ut  this,  they  were  reductions  made  by  the  depart- 
ment for  the  ])urpose  of  adjusthig  the  space  to  the  needs 
of  the  service,  as  they  construed  it,  were  they  not,  under 
the  space  system  ? 


206 

Answer.  Why,  undoubtedly,  that  was  one  thing,  but  I 
could  only  judge  from  the  effect  as  to  what  it  was,  that  it 
was  economy. 

Question.  Well,  economy  would  ])robably  flow  from 
administrative  acts,  but  I  am  speaking  now  of  the  primary 
object  of  adjusting  the  space  authorized  to  what  the 
department  believed  the  needs  were,  and  that  was  the 
purpose,  was  it  not? 

Answer.  I  don't  know  what  the  purpose  was,  other  than 
that  the  reductions  were  made.  I  assumed  that  it  was  due 
to  the  desire  to  economize,  and  that  they  felt  they  could 
get  along  with  less  space,  although,  in  some  instances,  it 
was  a  reduction,  and  in  other  cases  it  would  have  been  an 
increase  as  of  November  1.     (R.  2115,  2116.) 

PAYMENTS  UNDER  SPACE-BASIS  SYSTEM. 

METHOD    OF   MAKING   PAYMENTS   TJNDER   THE    SPACE- 
BASIS  SYSTEM. 

Mr.  CoRRiDON  testified  on  cross-examination  as  follows: 

Question  (by  Mr.  Wood).  How  long  does  it  take  you  to 
close  your  accounts  with  the  railroad  company  under  the 
space  basis  for,  let  us  say,  the  business  of  a  year  ? 

***** 

Answer.  I  can  say  generally  that  the  accounts  for  the 
year  ending  June  30,  1918,  had,  on  December  30,  been 
settled  completely,  with  the  exception  of  S2,000  on  two 
routes,  which  I  will  give  you  and  put  in  the  record.  That 
means  that  out  of  the  ajjpropriations  or  the  payments  due 
of  approximately  S56,.500,000,  the  accounts  of  the  rail- 
roads had  been,  by  December  30,  all  settled,  with  the 
exception  of  S2,000;  that  is,  with  the  exception  of  routes 
131547  and  167506,  the  entire  sum  of  .156,613,809.01  had 
been  settled,  with  the  exception  of  S2,000. 


206 

error  or  some  sort  of  an  error  committed,  the  accomit  is 
not  closed,  does  it  not?  It  is  still  open  to  correction,  is 
it  not? 

Answer.  Such  an  account  as  would  reveal  a  clerical  er- 
ror— if  ;^ou  will  let  me  amplify  my  statement. 

Question.  All  wo  are  trying  to  get  at  is  the  facts. 

Answer.  We  will  take,  for  instance,  if  you  will  let  me 
state  a  case  where  an  account  is  not  closed — we  will  close 
an  account  for  the  month  of  November.  After  closing  that 
account,  we  will  find  that  there  has  been  an  authorization 
affecting  that  account  that  might  go  back  18  months. 
For  example,  we  may  have  found  that  a  30-foot  car  was 
authorizod  to  a  ^iven  division  point.  It  may  turn  out 
afterwards  that  there  was  an  error  in  that  authorization 
of  that  service,  and  the  company  claims  they  are  entitled 
to  a  further  run  on  that  30-foot  car  with  return.  That 
would  naturally  affect  the  payments  for  four  or  five 
months.  Such  accounts  were  readily  corrected,  if  there 
was  a  clerical  error;  but  where  a  ruling  of  the  department 
is  involved,  and  they  are  protesting  that  ruling,  the  account 
is  closed,  so  far  as  the  Post  Office  Department  is  concerned. 
***** 

Question.  How  long  does  it  take,  would  you  say,  to 
close  up  the  accounts  of  that  sort,  after  the  service  is  ren- 
dered ?  You  say  they  drag  on  for  months.  How  long  do 
they  drag  on  ? 

Answer.  In  some  exceptional  cases  they  may  drag  on 
for  two  or  three  months. 

Question.  You  said  18  months  a  moment  ago,  in  giving 
your  illustration. 

Answer.  Well,  I  said  it  might  affect  accounts  18  months 
back,  but  when  they  are  dragging  on— you  want  to  know 
whether  an  account,  after  we  determine  that  there  has 
been  an  error  made  18  months  back,  how  long  it  would 
take  us  to  bring  that  account  to  payment? 

Question.  Assuming  that  you  do  take  two  or  three 
months  to  do  that,  then  you  have  to  go  back  and  adjust 
possibly  18  months,  you  say? 

Answer.  Yes;  in  such  a  case.     (R.  408-413.) 

He  also  testified  on  re-direct  examination  as  follows: 

Question  (by  Mr.  Stewart).  Now,  Mr.  Corridon,  with 
reference  to  the  settlement  of  accounts,  state  whether  or 
not  it  is  true  that  the  great  body  of  accounts  is  settled 
promptly  montlily  after  the  certification  of  service. 

Answer.  The  system  is  tliis:  We  have  the  authorized 
annual  rate  of  pay.  That  fluctuates  daily.  We  take  that 
statement  of  service  on  the  last  of  the  month,  or,  perhaps, 


207 

the  25th  of  the  month.  We  certify  to  the  auditor  approxi- 
mately 100  per  cent  of  that  amount  in  the  case  of  each 
railroad  about  five  days  before  the  end  of  the  month.  We 
ascertain  it,  perliaps,  five  days  before,  in  order  that  it  may 
be  certified  to  the  auditor,  and  the  checks  mailed  promptly 
to  the  roads.  So  they  are  paid  each  month  approximately 
100  per  cent  of  their  compensation  in  advance  of  the  re- 
ceipt of  the  affidavit  upon  which  the  service  is  charged. 
The  adjustment  is  then  made  finally  upon  the  receipt  of 
the  affidavit.  If  that  100  per  cent  has  been  a  little  too 
much,  the  adjustment  is  made,  and  the  deduction  is  made 
in  the  next  follo^^ing  month.  That  is  done  in  order  that 
the  roads  may  receive  their  compensation  promptly. 

In  emergency  service,  which  amounts  to  2.81  per  cent, 
or  between  that  and  3 ^  per  cent  of  the  entire  compensation, 
those  affidavits  come  along  a  little  after  the  affidavits  of 
the  regular  service.  They  are  adjusted  as  rapidly  as  our 
forces  can  accomplish  the  work  and  send  for  certification. 

Question.  You  spoke  of  certain  parts  being  held  in 
abeyance.  You  refer,  I  assume,  to  some  part  of  this  2.81 
per  cent  emergency  service? 

Answer.  No;  not  altogether. 

Question.  Not  altogether  ? 

Answer.  Because  there  are  some  of  the  regular  affida- 
vits that  are  involved  also. 

Question.  Have  you  any  idea  of  the  proportional  part 
of  the  amount  in  controversy  as  you  described — just  ap- 
proximately ?     I  don't  imagine  you  have  the  exact  figures. 

Answer.  Well,  based  on  the  last  fiscal  year,  as  I  testified 
heretofore  on  December  30,  there  were  then  just  two  un- 
adjusted routes,  the  value  of  the  service  being  $2,000. 
That  would  indicate  that  the  entire  service  for  the  fiscal 
year  ending  June  30,  1918,  was  adjusted  before  the  close 
of  the  calendar  year. 

***** 

Question.  You  referred  in  one  of  your  answers  to  the 
1916  authorizations.  Will  you  state  why  there  should  be 
any  special  reason,  if  there  is  any,  that  accounts  dating 
back  as  far  as  1916  might  still  be  in  controversy,  bearing 
in  mind  the  fact  that  the  basis  of  the  service  was  shifted 
in  November,  1916,  from  weight  to  space? 

Answer.  It  was  that  shift,  Mr.  Stewart,  that  caused 
some  of  these  readjustments. 

Question.  So  that  when  the  effects  of  the  change  in  sys- 
tem had  been  fully  worked  out,  there  would  be  no  such 
comment  upon  the  work  of  adjustment? 

Answer.  They  would  be  rare.     (R.  427-429.) 


208 

EVIDENCE    OF    PERFORMANCE    OF    SERVICE    BY    RAIL- 
ROAD COMPANIES. 

Mr.  Knox  testified  on  direct  examination  as  follows: 

On  the  basis  of  this  authorization,  the  railroad  company 
makes  affidavit  in  a  form  prescribed  by  the  department, 
which  form  is  submitted  by  the  company  to  the  division 
superintendent  for  checking  and  certification.  If  correct 
in  all  particulars,  final  certification  is  attached  to  the  affi- 
davit stating  that  there  are  no  exceptions  to  be  taken.  If 
affidavit  fails  to  cover  all  service,  the  same  is  returned  to 
the  company  for  correction,  as  no  payment  can  be  made 
for  service  not  covered  by  the  affidavit  of  the  company. 
If  excess  service  is  claimed  due  to  probably  clerical  error, 
or  if  other  clerical  errors  are  noted  not  involving  excess 
service,  the  certification  of  the  division  superintendent 
embraces  the  points  noted  as  exceptions  to  the  correctness 
of  the  affidavit.  The  affidavit  upon  being  forwarded  to 
the  department  by  the  division  superintendent  is  trans- 
mitted to  the  Division  of  Railway  Adjustments,  where 
same  is  checked  and  payment  is  made  on  the  basis  of 
service  actually  performed  minus  fines  and  deductions. 
In  order  to  avoid  delays,  the  Department  has  adopted  the 
practice  of  paying  to  operating  companies  each  month  100 
per  cent  of  the  authorized  annual  rate  of  compensation 
without  waiting  for  the  receipt  of  affidavits  covering 
service.  Under  these  conditions,  the  affidavit  is  of  use 
principally  to  make  deduction  from  payments  made  or 
to  pay  any  increases  due  the  company  on  account  of  addi- 
tional service  performed  because  of  recently  issued 
authorizations. 

Question  (by  Mr.  Stewart)  .  Right  there,  Mr.  Knox,  as  I 
imderstand  you,  the  department  does  not  wait,  in  making 
payments,  for  the  formal  presentation  of  these  affidavits 
and  their  checking,  but  anticipating  that,  they  make  100 
per  cent  payment  on  the  basis  of  the  authorizations  ? 

Answer.  That  is  the  method  as  I  understand  it;  yes,  sir. 

Question.  You  may  proceed. 

Answer.  Final  settlement  involving  these  minor  changes 
is  made  once  a  quarter. 

Question.  And  that  is  made  on  the  checking  of  these 
affidavits  ? 

Answer.  That  is  made  on  the  checking  of  the  affidavits, 
which  are  presented  either  monthly  or  quarterly,  depend- 
ing upon  the  importance  of  the  fine.     (R.  3022-3023^.) 


209 

NINETY   PER   CENT   OF  THE    PAY   UNDER    SPACE-BASIS 
SYSTEM   IS   FOR   THE   MOVEMENT   OF   CARS   WHERE 
THERE  IS  PAYMENT  FOR  SUCH  MOVEMENT  IN  BOTH 
DIRECTIONS. 
Mr.  Brauer  testified  on  direct  examination  as  follows : 

Ninety  per  cent  of  the  payments  that  arc  made  to  the 
carriers  are  for  service  that  is  stated  in  botli  directions, 
and  paid  for  in  both  directions.     CR.  3388.) 

FIFTY  PER  CENT  OF  EMERGENCY  SPACE  IS  PAID  FOR  IN 
BOTH  DIRECTIONS. 

Mr.  Brauer  testified  on  direct  examination  as  follows: 

The  emergency  service  *  *  *  is  2.81  per  cent  of  the 
whole  business,  and  50  per  cent  of  that  is  carried  in  60-foot 
cars,  that  are  paid  for  both  waj's.     (R.  3388.) 

SOME  PARALLEL  BETWEEN  WEIGHT-BASIS  STSTEM  ANJ^ 
SPACE-BASIS  SYSTEM,   SO  FAR  AS  METHOD  IS  CON- 
CERNED. 
Mr.  Fairfield  testified  on  cross-examination  as  follows: 
Question  (by  Mr.  Stewart).     *     *     *     I  will  ask  you 
whether  it  is  not  parallel  so  far  as  the  method  is  concerned, 
one  being  based  upon  the  weight  carried  and  the  other  be- 
ing based  upon  an  effort  to  ascertain  the  space  occupied.     Is 
not  that  correct^     We  will  leave  aside  any   question  of 
whether  you  get  adequately  paid  or  not. 

Answer.  Well,  there  might  be  something  parallel  to  it. 
(R.  2331.) 

EFF3RT  OF  DEPARTMENT  TO  PAY  FOR  EMERGENCT 
MAILS  H;\S  GONE  BEYOND  ANY  EFFORT  TO  COM- 
PENSATE ON  WEIGHT  BASIS  FOR  FLUCTUATIONS  IN 
MAILS. 

Mr.  Pettibone  testified  on  cross-examination  as  follows: 

Question  (by  Mr.  Stewart).  So  that  the  department 
tried  to  pay  your  company  for  that  fluctuation  under  the 
space  basis,  an  effort  which  has  gone  beyond  what  has 
ever  been  made  to  compensate  you  under  the  weight  basis. 
Is  not  that  true? 

Answer.  I  really  am  unable  to  answer  that  question.  I 
reaUv  can  not  conceive  of  any  system  that  necessitates  the 
cleri(-al  labor  incident  to  writing  communications  and 
notifying  and  check  that  will  save  one  foot  of  space. 

Question.  Well,  assume  that  it  is  burdensome  and  it 
involves  clerical  work  and  all  that,  but  are  vou  not  willing 
to  say  what  is  perfectly  apparent,  that  after  all  that  is 

122G98— 19 14 


210 

said,  *  *  *  it  is  an  cfTort  on  tlie  part  of  the  depart- 
ment to  pay  3^011  for  that  service  which  was  never  made 
under  the  weight  hasis '( 

Answer.  Well,  the  administration  of  the  weight  basis 
was  never  achuinistered — it  never  was  attempted  to  take 
care  of  the  fhictuating  load. 

Question.  That  is  exactly  what  I  want. 

Answer.  Because  you  have  an  incentive  every  day  to 
cut  off  every  foot  that  you  can.  You  never  had  that 
incentive  under  the  weight  basis. 

Question.  But  granting  all  that  to  be  true,  does  not  the 
sj^stem  at  the  same  time  pay  you  for  all  the  fluctuation 
upward,  as  well  as  reduced  compensation  downward,  where 
it  occurs,  and  in  addition  pays  you  for  this  volume  of  mail 
which  you  never  did  get  paid  for  before  under  the  weight 
basis'? 

Answer.  I  am  not  able  to  discern  what  the  spirit  of  the 
orders  was  that  emanate  from  the  Post  Office  Department, 
but  I  am  prepared  to  state  that  in  their  administration  in 
the  field  the  great  majority  of  revisions  are  downward 
instead  of  upward. 

Question.  Well,  you  only  mentioned  downward,  but 
you  have  heard  the  testimony  here  of  other  witnesses  that 
have  shown  upward  revisions  as  well  as  downward,  have 
you  not  ? 

Answer.  Yes,  sir;  some  of  them  did. 

Question.  So  that  it  might  be  conceded  that  the  depart- 
ment is  fair  about  that. 

Now,  is  it  not  true  that  this  emergency  service  is  actually 
performed  by  the  railroad  companies  in  the  first  instance, 
and  that  all  of  this  eft'ort  of  which  there  has  been  so  much 
criticism  is  an  effort  on  the  part  of  the  employees  of  the 
Post  Office  Department  on  the  one  side  and  the  employees 
of  the  railroad  company  on  the  other  side  to  measure  the 
extent  of  that  additional  service  which  has  been  performed 
by  the  railroad  companies?     Is  not  that  correct? 

Answer.  Yes,  sir;  that  is  the  only  method  by  which  we 
can  be  compensated.     (R.  2413,  2414.) 

SOME  FEATURES  OF  RAILROADS'  PERFORMANCE 
OF  ^lAIL  SERVICE. 

HANDLING  OF  MAILS   AT  NIGHT   AT   LOCAL  RAILROAD 
STATIONS. 

Mr.  Knox  testified  on  direct  examination  as  follows: 

Question  (by  Mr.  Stewart).   Are  you  familiar  with  the 
manner  of  handling  mails  at  night  at  local  railroad  stations  ? 
Answer.  Yes,  sir;  I  am. 


211 

Question.  Will  you  please  state  what  that  method  is  ^ 

Answer.  The  Postal  Laws  and  Regulations  provide  that 
mails  for  local  stations  alono-  the  line  of  any  railroad  must 
he  handled  by  railway  employees  in  the  event  post  office 
is  not  more  than  80  rods  from  the  railroad  station  of  that 
line.  Paragraph  2  of  section  1346,  Postal  Laws  and  Regula- 
tions, covers  this  point.    It  reads  as  follows: 

The  railroad  company  must  also  take  the  mails  from  and  deliver  them 
into  all  intermediate  post  offices  and  postal  stations  located  not  more  than 
80  rods  from  the  nearest  railroad  station  at  which  the  company  has  an 
agent  or  other  representative  employed. 

Question  (V)y  Attorney  Examiner  Brown).  I  notice  you 
say  "  law."    Is  that  in  the  statute  or  is  that  the  regulation  ? 

Answer.  Tliat  is  a  regulation.  The  book  is  referred  to 
as  the  Postal  Laws  and  Regulations.    Tliey  come  together. 

*  *  *  and  the  company  shall  not  be  relieved  of  such  duty  on  account 
of  the  discontinuance  of  an  agency  ^vithout  30  days'  notice  to  the  depart- 
ment. 

Section  1351  provides  especially  for  the  handling  of  mails 
at  night,  this  section  reading  as  follows: 

\\Tienever  the  mail  on  any  railroad  route  arrives  at  a  late  hour  of  the 
night,  or  at  a  time  when  the  Government  messenger  is  not  on  hand  to 
receive  it.  the  railroad  company  must  retain  custody  thereof  by  placing 
the  mail  in  a  secure  and  safe  room  or  apartment  of  the  depot  or  station 
until  called  for  or  until  the  following  morning,  when  it  must  be  delivered 
at  the  post  office,  or  to  the  mail  messenger  employed  by  the  Post  Office 
Department,  at  as  early  an  hour  as  the  necessities  of  the  post  office  may 
require. 

In  connection  with  this  section  of  the  Postal  Laws  and 
Regulations,  it  is  the  practice  of  the  Post  Office  Depart- 
ment, where  post  offices  are  located  more  than  80  rods  from 
the  railroad  station,  and  exchanges  with  night  trains  are 
made,  to  have  the  messenger  meet  these  night  trains  and 
make  the  exchange,  taking  the  mails  to  and  from  the  post 
office  at  the  time  the  exchange  is  made. 

Section  1352  of  the  Postal  Laws  and  Regulations  pro- 
vides that  when  a  train  departs  from  a  railroad  station  in 
the  night  time  later  than  9  o'clock,  and  it  is  deemed  neces- 
sary to  have  the  mails  dispatched  by  such  train,  the  divi- 
sion superintendent  of  the  Railway  Mail  Service  shall 
request  the  company  to  take  the  mails  to  the  railroad  sta- 
tion at  such  time  as  will  best  serve  the  interests  of  the  mail 
service. 

Question  (by  Mr.  Stew^vrt).  Now,  when  you  referred  to 
the  service  to  be  performed  by  the  mail  messenger,  that  is, 
a  departmental  mail  messenger,  is  it  not? 

Answer.  That  is  a  man  employed  by  the  Post  Office  De- 
partment on  a  monthly  compensation  basis. 

In  practice,  the  department  endeavors  to  avoid  receiv- 
ing and  dispatching  mails  at  any  station  where  a  night 


212 

agent  or  operator  is  not  em])l()yed  by  the  company.  In 
order  to  avoid  these  night  exchanges,  day  trains  are  util- 
ized to  carry  the  mail  ])ack  to  the  i)ost  office  in  question, 
transfer  being  made  at  some  other  point  along  the  line 
between  the  night  train  and  the  day  train. 

Question.  Now,  that  is  the  service  to  which  reference 
has  been  made  by  the  witnesses,  as  carrying  the  mails  by 
and  returning  them  on  other  trains? 

Answer.  That  is  the  service;  yes,  sir. 

Answer.  If,  on  account  of  train  schedules,  it  is  found  im- 
practicable to  handle  mails  for  certain  offices  by  returning 
these  mails  on  a  day  train  and  a  delay  w^ould  be  occasioned 
in  the  delivery  of  mail  or  dispatch  from  any  office  by  rural 
or  star  route,  then  the  company  is  required  to  make  the 
exchange  of  mails  with  the  night  trains  at  the  offices  in 
question.  If  the  night  train  stops,  it  is  frequently  arranged 
that  the  trainman  take  from  a  locked  ]>ox  or  room  in  the 
station  the  mail  for  outgoing  dispatch  and  place  in  this, 
box  or  in  this  room  mails  from  the  train  for  local  delivery. 
If  a  night  train  does  not  stop  at  station  where  the  exchange 
is  deemed  necessary,  then  the  company  is  required  to  place 
the  mails  on  a  crane  from  which  it  is  taken  by  clerks  in  the 
moving  train.  Tlie  company  is  tdso  required  to  handle  the 
mails  dispatched  from  this  movii  g  train.  Generally,  in 
these  instances,  some  employee  is  paid  overtime  by  the 
compar}^  for  this  particular  purpose. 

Question.  Do  3'ou  knew,  Mr.  Krox,  whether  this  ar- 
rangement which  you  have  been  describing  is  generally 
satisfactory  to  the  railroads,  as  well  as  to  the  department? 

Ai'swer.  I  have  had  no  complaints  as  to  the  arrangement 
in  question.  You  mean  the  arrangement  as  to  utilizing 
the  box  ? 

Question.  Yes;  and  also  as  to  carrying  the  mails  past, 
rather  than  requiring  an  emploj^ee  of  the  railroad  company 
to  be  on  hand  to  receive  them. 

Answer.  Oh,  there  is  never  any  objection  on  the  part  of 
the  company  to  carrying  the  mail  past  and  bringing  it 
back  on  the  day  train. 

Question.  In  fact,  that  is  very  often,  if  not  generally 
(done),  for  the  purpose  of  relieving  the  situation? 

Answer.  That  is  really  the  sole  purpose  for  its  being 
carried  by,  because,  except  in  cases  of  trains  that  do  not 
stop,  it  is  more  convenient  for  the  clerks  not  to  have  to 
make  exchanges  from  the  night  trains. 

Answer.  As  I  have  before  indicated,  and  as  testified  to  by 
Mr.  Seaile,  a  witness  ior  the  railroads,  in  relation  to  the 


213 

handling  of  mails  on  the  night  trains  of  the  Rock  Island 
road  between  St.  Louis  and  Kansas  City,  the  department 
endeavors  to  relieve  the  company  from  this  duty  of  ex- 
change of  mails  wherever  possible,  the  prompt  handling 
of  mails  so  as  to  avoid  delay  in  deliver}^  being  the  first 
consideration.  Cases  where  companies  are  required  to 
utilize  the  services  of  an  employee  to  exchange  mails  at 
night  with  trains  that  do  not  stop  at  stations  are  not 
frequent.      (R.  3058-3062.) 

NIGHT  EXCHANGES  OF  MAIL  NOT  MA-QE  WHERE  IT  IS 
PRACTICABLE  TD  CARRY  THEM  BY  AND  RETURN 
BY  MORNING  TRAINS. 

Mr.  Knox  testified  on  cross-examination  as  follows: 
Question  (by  Mr.  Wood).  Now,  there  are  many  sec- 
tions of  the  West  in  which  there  are  not  more  than  one 
or  two  trains  a  day  over  a  given  railroad.  Do  not  most  of 
those  trains  carry  mail  and  put  it  off  at  local  stations,  as 
they  go   along,  and  take  it  on  ? 

Answer.  Not  where  the  mail  can  be  turned  back  in  the 
morning  in  time  to  make  the  delivery  at  the  local,  the 
small  ofhce.  In  the  case  that  Mr.  Searle  mentioned, 
where  it  is  done  midway  between  St.  Louis  and  Kansas 
City,  the  day  train  does  not  get  up  there  early  enough  in 
either  direction.  Therefore  they  have  to  make  the  ex- 
change, or  up  toward  St.  Louis,  where  the  morning  train 
starts  out,  the  mails  are  taken  off  to  a  great  extent,  to  the 
small  offices.      (R.  3063.) 

NIGHT  EXCHANGES  OF  MAIL  COMPARATIVELY  INFRE- 
QUENT. 

Mr.  Knox  testified  on  cross-examination  as  follows: 

Question  (by  Mr.  Wood).  Mr.  Knox,  there  are  a  great 
many  cases,  are  there  not,  covered  by  your  statement,  in 
which  I  understand  what  you  call  night  exchanges  to 
mean  the  receipt  and  delivery  of  mails  by  the  railroad 
company  at  night,  which  involves  the  employment  of  an 
extra  man,  or  involves  overtime  with  respect  to  some 
employee  of  the  railroad  company? 

Answer.  In  the  aggregate  there  are  quite  a  number  of 
cases.  As  com])ared  with  the  total  number  of  exchanges 
made,  they  are  comi)aratively  infrequent. 

Question.  Now,  what  is  the  i)roportion  ? 

Answer.  I  have  no  figures  on  that. 

Question.  How  are  you  able  to  say,  then,  that  all  over 
these   United  States  the  nunil)er  of  cases  in   which   the 


•214 

railroad  coinj)aiiiGs  have  to  pay  overtime,  on  account  of 
that  seivice  at  night,  is  comparatively  small  as  related  to 
the  aggregate? 

Answer.  WeU,  I  referred  to  either  overtime  or  having  a 
man  exclusively,  if  there  is  no  night  agent  on  duty.  They 
either  have  to  pay  overtime  or  hire  somebody.  I  based  it 
upon  the  fact  that  we  did  not  make  many  exchanges  at 
night  on  night  trains.  They  are  infrequent.  Night  trains 
run  through,  exchanging  only  at  the  larger  stations  on 
many  hues  throughout  the  country.  The  smaller  stations, 
where  this  condition  prevails,  are  not  considered  to  a  large 
extent.      (R.  3062,  3063.) 

THE  COOPERATION  OF  THE  DEPARTMENT  WITH  THE 
RAILROADS  IN  RELIEVING  THEM  OF  LABOR  AND 
EXPENSE  IN  THE  DELIVERY  OF  MAILS  WHEN  THE 
TRAINS  PASS  AT  NIGHT. 

Mr.  Gaines  testified  on  direct  examination  as  follows: 

Question  (by  Mr.  Stewart).  Bearing  in  mind  the  testi- 
mony of  Mr.  Mack  with  reference  to  the  exchange  of  mails 
at  night,  wiU  you  please  state  what  your  knowledge  is  with 
reference  to  that  ? 

Answer.  Mr.  Mack  referred  to  cases  where  mails  were  ex- 
changed late  at  night  or  early  in  the  morning  at  local  points  on 
the  railroad,  and  at  hours  when  the  company  has  no  other 
business  whatever  than  the  exchange  of  mails,  thus  forcing 
additional  expense.  He  did  not  say  anything  about  the 
cooperation  which  he  has  consistently  and  regularly  re- 
ceived from  the  railway  mail  service  for  the  purpose  of 
avoiding  all  unnecessary  expense.  Every  reasonable  ex- 
pedient is  used  which  is  consistent  with  good  service. 
For  instance,  when  a  tram  passes  a  certain  point  late  at 
night  and  when  there  is  no  agent  on  duty  and  an  opposing 
train  can  be  used  so  as  to  deliver  the  mail  at  the  point 
addressed  in  time  for  business  the  next  morning,  and  when 
the  agent  is  on  duty,  the  mail  is  not  put  off  at  nioht.  But 
it  is  brought  back  by  the  opposing  train  and  delivered  in 
order  to  avoid  expense  to  the  railroad  company. 

Question.  And  that  is  the  service  to  which  reference  has 
been  made  as  carrying  the  mails  past  ? 

Answer.  Yes,  Again,  railroad  companies  are  permitted 
to  build  receptacles  for  mail  delivered  at  night,  in  which 
receptacles  an  employee  on  the  night  train  stopping  at 
the  station  can  place  the  mail,  the  same  to  be  delivered  by 
the  agent  to  the  post  office  the  following  morning.  Of 
course  that  expedient  could  not  be  used  in  case  where  the 
schedule  did  not  provide  for  stops  of  that  train.     But  this 


215 

is  the  usual  practice  as  far  as  I  know,  and  must  result  in  re- 
lieving the  company  of  additional  expense  at  local  stations. 
Except  in  comparatively  few  instances  the  arrangements 
in  force  are  those  that  were  in  force  under  the  weight 
basis.  (R.  3244,  3245.) 

PILING  MA.IL  IN"  CLOSED-POUCH  UNITS  AND  DISTRIBUT- 
ING CARS. 

Mr.  Knox  testified  on  direct  examination  as  follows: 

Answer.  *  *  *  If  stanchion  posts  are-  placed  in 
baggage  cars,  stalls  in  closed-pou,ch  units  can  be  piled 
as  received  in  station  order  by  train  baggagemen  with- 
out particular  difficulty,  from  which  stalls  they  may  be 
unloaded  as  required.  Any  additional  mails  received 
can  be  placed  in  the  proper  order  with  little  diffi- 
culty as  a  rule.  It  should  be  borne  in  mind  that  3 
feet' both  sides  of  the  car  is  paid  for  and  that  45  sacks  as  a 
maximum  are  not  in  the  unit  over  any  great  portion  of  the 
run.  It  is,  no  doubt,  not  so  convenient  to  pile  mails  in  this 
restricted  space  if  the  train  baggageman  chooses  to  scatter 
mails  all  over  the  car  with  express  and  baggage;  it  would 
probably  meet  with  no  objection  from  anyone  connected 
with  the  post-office  service,  provided  it  is  first  ascertained 
that  the  mails  in  question  can  be  accommodated  in  the 
unit  provided,  so  that  proper  authorizations  can  be  issued 
for  emergency  space  if  necessary.  When  mails  are  scat- 
tered over  the  baggage-car  floor,  space  used  by  the  mails  is 
reduced  to  a  minimum,  and  the  space  occupied  by  mails  on 
top  of  trunks  and  baggage  and  boxes  is  that  which  can  not 
be  used  in  any  other  way. 

Question  (by  Mr.  Stewart).  Now,  Mr.  Knox,  local  mails 
are  piled  by  the  railway  postal  clerks  in  stalls  in  the  distrib- 
uting cars  for  dispatch  "from  the  cars  at  the  proper  pomt? 

Answer.  They  are. 

Question.  Do  the  clerks  have  any  difficulty  in  handling 
the  mails  in  this  manner  in  the  restricted  space,  and  if  not, 
what  bearing  does  this  have  upon  the  contention  of  the  rail- 
way employees  that  they  can  not  handle  the  mails  in  the 
same  manner  ? 

Answer.  Postal  clerks  have  no  such  difficulty.  Mails  are 
frec^uently  piled  in  a  door  not  necessary  to  be  iised  for 
station  service,  until  the  train  has  proceeded  a  considerable 
distance  out  of  the  initial  terminal.  Mails  of  this  character 
for  local  dispatch  can  not  be  piled  all  over  the  mail  car  or 
apartment  car.  The  load  carried  and  the  distributing 
facihties  that  must  be  used  render  this  practice  impossible. 
(R.  3055-3057.) 


216 

MAXIMUM   LOAD   IN   CLOSED-POUCH   UNITS   IS   AT   THE 
INITIAL  TERMINAL. 

Mr.  Knox  testified  on  direct  examination  as  follows : 

Answer.  The  maximum  load  in  closed-pouch  units  is 
practically  in  every  instance  at  the  initial  terminal.  Where 
mails  are  picked  up  en  route  they  are  usually  of  small  vol- 
ume and  the  quantity  which  lias  been  taken  on  at  the  initial 
terminal  is  generally  largely  reduced  before  the  point  is 
reached  where  these  intermediate  mails  are  picked  up. 
*     *     *     (R.  3055.) 

STOPPING  OF  TRAINS  FOR  PARCEL  POST. 

Mr.  Knox  testified  on  direct  examination  as  follows : 

Question  (by  Mr.  Stewart)  .  What  is  the  practice  with 
reference  to  stopping  trains  for  parcel  post,  of  which 
mention  has  been  made  in  the  testimony? 

Answer.  Parcel-post  service  in  connection  with  closed- 
pouch  trams  or  with  apartment  trains  involves  the  require- 
ment on  the  part  of  the  railroad  company  to  stop  one  train 
in  each  direction  each  day  over  any  i^articular  route  to  load 
and  unload  parcel-post  mails.  The  train  selected  to 
handle  these  mails  is  invariably  a  local  train  due  to  stop  at 
post  offices  and  stations  not  post  offices  on  flag  signal.  It 
is  only  occasionally  that  a  train  is  stopped  for  parcel-post 
busmess  alone.  Even  if  so,  this  condition  is  due  to  the 
establishment  of  parcel-post  service  and  not  to  the  space- 
basis  system  of  payment,  and  no  relief  can  be  afforded  by 
any  change  in  the  method  of  payment  to  the  railroad 
company. 

Question.  That  is,  the  same  practice  obtained  under  the 
old  system  that  obtains  now"  ? 

Answer.  The  same  practice  o})tained  before  the  space 
basis  went  into  effect  as  is  now  in  effect;  that  is,  after  the 
parcel-])ost  business  was  established. 

Question.  And  but  one  train  a  day  where  such  selection 
is  made  is  designated,  and  that  train  is  a  comparatively 
unimportant  train  on  the  line  ? 

Answer.  Always  the  slowest  local  train  on  the  line.  (R 
3057,3058.) 


217 

REPRESENTATIONS   TO   CONGRESS    REGARDING 
PAY. 

REPRESENTATIONS  BEFORE  THE  PASSAGE  OF  THE  ACT 
OF  1916  THAT  THE  EFFECT  OF  THE  STATUTE  WOULD 
BE  TO  INCREASE  THE  AGGREGATE  PAY  OF  THE  RAIL- 
ROADS WAS  BASED  UPON  THE  APPLICATION  OF  THE 
UNIT  RATES  WITHOUT  ALLOWING  FOR  ECONOMICAL 
READJUSTMENT  OF  SERVICE. 

Mr.  WoRTHrxGTON  testified  on  cross-examination  as 
follows : 

Question  (by  Mr.. Stewart).  I  think  roii  stated  in  re- 
gard to  the  legislation  of  1916  —and  I  refer  now  to  what  is 
generally  spoken  of  as  the  space-basis  legislation—that  it 
was  not  understood  by  the  framers  of  that  law  that  the 
effect  of  it  would  be  to  reduce  the  aggregate  railroad  mail 
transportation.     Is  that  correct  ? 

Answer.  I  didn't  say  positively  it  was  not  understood, 
I  think  I  said  I  thought  it  was  not  understood,  and  I  don't 
see  how  it  could  haA'e  been  understood  by  anybody,  how 
thev  could  have  anticipated  the  effect  the  space  basis  has 
had.  In  fact  I  think,  rather  to  the  contrary,  there  was  a 
general  impression  given  out  that  it  would  raise  the  rates 
$3,000,000  when  it  was  put  in. 

Question  (bv  Attorney-Examiner  Browx).  I  think  you 
stated  yesterday  that  that  was  repeatedly  stated  during 
the  liearmg. 

Answer,  Yes;  I  think  it  was,  and  I  think  there  is  a  state- 
ment— I  don't  want  to  be  positive  about  this,  but  I  think 
there  is  a  statement  in  one  of  the  annual  reports  of  the  Post- 
master General  a  couple  of  years  ago  that  there  would  be 
an  hicrease  in  pay  of  about  $3,000,000, 

Question  (])y  Mr,  Stewart).  Is  it  not  true,  however, 
that  that  conclusion  or  statement  was  based  entirely  upon 
the  application  of  the  unit  rate  by  Congress  for  the  pay- 
ment for  service  at  that  time,  naturally? 

Answer,  I  should  think  so,      (R.  1603,  1604.) 

THE  INCREASE  IN  RAILROAD  MAIL  PAY  REPRESENTED 
TO   CONGRESS   AS   A   RESULT   OF  THE    SPACE-BASIS 
LEGISLATION. 
Dr.  LoREXZ,  It  has  been  suggested  to  me  that  the  ques- 
tion I  asked  some  time  ago  about  this  increase  not  in- 
cluding the  $63,000,000  mail  after  the  space  basis  was  put 
in  was  that  the  rate  for  the  space  had  been  determined 
before  there  had  been  a  shakedown  and  that  the  shakedown 
accounts  for  the  reduction  in  the  revenue.     Is  that  so, 
Mr,  Stewart '. 


218 

Mr.  Stf^wart.  I  will  state  also  in  connection  witli  what 
the  witness  has  said  that  it  was  represented  hefore  the 
Bourne  Commission  tliat  the  adoption  of  the  space  hasis 
would  increase  the  pay  to  railroads,  that  that  $63,000,000 
])ay  is  the  actual  figure  re])resented  in  the  pay  hy  the  in- 
crease in  the  unit  rates.  It  was  the  increase  in  the  unit 
rates  as  estimated  by  the  department  over  the  pay  re- 
ceived on  the  weight  basis  for  tiie  same  unit  of  service  that 
was  meant  by  that,  and  when  the  service  was  restated 
U])on  the  rates  fixed  by  Congress  on  the  space  basis,  it 
automatically  increased  the  aggregate  of  this  $63,000,000, 
and  then  after  the  service  was  readjusted  on  the  basis  of 
the  needs  of  space  for  the  service  performed  these  subse- 
quent decreases  occurred.     (R.  1399,  1400.) 

LAND-GRANT  PROVISION. 

LAND-GRANT  PROVISION  OF  LAW. 

During  the  dii-ect  testimony  of  Mr.  Pettibone,  of  the 
Northern  Pacific  Railway,  a  discussion  ensued  between 
Attorney  Examiner  Brown,  Mr.  Wood,  and  Mr.  Stewart 
as  to  the  respective  contentions  of  the  railroad  and  the 
department  as  to  the  land-grant  deductions. 

Mr.  Wood.  Mr.  Examiner,  I  think  that  probably  this  is 
as  good  a  place  as  any  for  me  to  make  a  statement  that  I 
have  wanted  to  put  into  the  record  in  connection  witli  the 
land-grant  routes  or  the  land-grant  parts  of  routes,  and 
that  is  that  since  the  space  basis  has  been  in  operation  it  is 
mj  understanding  that  the  land-grant  routes  have  filed 
formal  protests  against  the  land-grant  reductions  upon  the 
theory  that  they  were  illegal. 

Attorney  Examiner  Browx.  Illegal  under  the  space  sys- 
tem or  illegal  under  any  system  ? 

Mr,  Wood.  Well,  they  were  not  properly  deducted  under 
the  provisions  of  the  present  law  as  related  to  the  original 
legislation. 

Now,  I  have  no  desire  to  enter  into  an  argument  upon 
that  proposition,  but  it  should  be  made  to  appear  clearly 
on  the  record  that  that  is  the  position  of  these  railroads 
which  have  these  land-grant  routes. 

Attorney  Exammer  Brown.  That  is  to  say,  in  naming 
any  plan  or  sj^stem  that  the  commission  may  authorize  or 
direct  to  be  put  into  eft'ect,  it  should  not  take  into  consid- 
eration the  fact  that  some  ofthese  railroads  are  land-grant 
roads. 

Mr.  Wood.  Yes,  sir. 


219 

Attorn e}'  Examiner  Browx.  That  is  your  ])osition? 

Mr.  Wood.  Yes,  sir. 

Attorney  Examiner  Beown.  And  you  ask  to  present 
that  to  the  conmiission  as  a  matter  of  law  ? 

Mr.  Wood.  The  attitude  of  the  land-grant  lines  will  be 
presented  at  the  argument  as  a  matter  of  law. 

Mr.  Stewart.  I  do  not  presume  it  is  necessary  for  me  to 
state  here  formally  that  the  ]iosition  of  the  department  is 
that  the  reduction  provided  to  apply  to  land-grant  roads 
is  in  accordance  with  the  act  of  Congress,  and  that  follow- 
ing the  usual  rule  in  other  cases  where  the  commission  has 
pa'ssed  upon  questions  ofdike  nature  the  commission  has 
fixed  a  rate  subject  to  tne  usual  reduction  by  Congress; 
further,  that  the  last  paragraph  of  the  statute  or  of  the 
law  of  1916  specifically  provides  for  this  20  per  cent  re- 
duction.    (R.  2381-2383.) 

FAST-MAIL  TRAINS. 

WHEN   PREFERENCE    IS    GIVEN    MAILS   ON   FAST-MAIL 
TRAINS. 

Mr.  Gaines  testified  on  direct  examination  as  foUows: 

Question  (by  Mr.  Stewart).  Now,  stiU  bearing  in  mind, 
Mr.  Gaines,  J^Ir.  Mack's  testimony,  he  laid  special  stress 
upon  the  fast-mail  trains  and  their  relation  to  the  mail 
service  especially.   What  have  you  to  say  in  regard  to  that  ? 

Answer.  WeU,  the  fast-mail  trains — we  only  have  one  of 
that  designation  in  the  division  now — carry  express  as  well 
as  mail. 

Question.  I  believe  he  made  a  special  claim  that  the 
mail  is  handled  on  the  fastest  train,  while  express  had  to 
lay  over.  Have  you  anything  to  say  with  reference  to 
that  ? 

A.  In  the  case  of  the  Sunshine  Special,  I  understand  that 
that  is  true,  but  I  do  not  know  of  any  other  cases.  There 
may  be  some  that  would  not  come  under  my  personal 
knowledge.  I  will  say  this,  that  it  is,  of  course,  a  necessity 
for  the  railroad  company  to  furnish  space  to  satisfy  the 
authorizations  of  service.  It  might  be  that  on  some  occa- 
sions they,  having  to  provide  that  definite  space  for  the 
mail  service,  would  not  have  room  for  express,  and  part  of 
that  would  be  left  over.  I  do  not  doubt  that  occasionally 
there  are  cases  of  that  sort;  but  I  believe,  at  least  in  the  di- 
vision with  which  I  am  most  familiar,  they  are  rare.  (R. 
3245,  3246.) 


220 

RAILROAD  ^LVIL  SERVICE  CONSIDERED  DESIR- 
ABLE BY  THE  RAILROADS. 

THE  RAILROADS  HAVE  REGARDED  THE  ESTABLISH- 
MENT AND  MAINTENANCE  OF  MAIL  SERVICE  ON 
THEIR  LINES  AS  DESIRABLE. 

Mr.  CoRKiDOX  testified  on  re-direct  examination  as  fol- 
lows : 

Question  (by  Mr.  Stewart).  Mr.  Corridon,  as  superin- 
tendent of  railway  adjustments  you  have  had  occasion  to 
deal  directly  with  the  railroads  in  reference  to  the  estab- 
lishment and  cohtinuance  and  maintenance  of  railroad 
mail  service  on  their  lines.  I  t^ill  ask  you  whether  it  is 
your  opinion  from  your  experience  that  the  railroads  have 
regarded  the  establishment  and  maintenance  of  service  as 
desirable  ? 

Answer.  They  haye.     (R.  732.) 

GENERAL  ATTITUDE  OF  RAILROADS  TOWARD  ESTAB- 
LISHMENT OF  NEW  MAIL  SERVICE. 

Mr.  McBride  testified  on  direct  examination  as  follows: 

Question  (by  Mr.  Stewart).  You  held  the  position  of 
superintendent  of  railway  adjustments  for  a  number  of 
years,  did  you  not  ? 

Answer.  Yes. 

Question.  During  that  period  it  was  your  duty  to  handle 
the  cases  relating  to  the  establishment  of  railway  mail 
service  ? 

Answer.  It  was. 

Question.  I  would  like  to  have  you  state  what  is  the 
general  attitude  of  the  railroads,  and  what  it  has  been, 
with  respect  to  the  desire  to  have  mail  service  established 
and  maintained  upon  their  railroads  ? 

Answer.  As  a  general  rule,  the  railroads  were  very 
anxious  to  have  mail  service  established  upon  their  lines. 
When  a  new  piece  of  track  was  constructed  and  ready  for 
operation,  there  was  usually  an  immediate  application  for 
mail  service. 

Question.  Did  they,  as  a  rule,  employ  attorneys  or 
agents  to  urge  their  claims  in  that  respect,  as  well  as  others, 
before  the  department? 

Answer.  One  of  the  duties  of  their  representatives  was 
tliat.     (R.  503,  504.) 


221 
SERVICE     REQUIREMENTS     AND     CONDITIONS. 

RAILAVAY    POST-OFFICE    CAR    SERVICE. 
FCTLL  RAILWAY  POST-OFFICE  CAR  SERVICE  DESCRIBED. 
Service  of  this  character  consists  of  the  transportation, 
handhng,  and  distribntion  and  delivery  en  route  of  mails 
in  60-foot  full  raihvav  post-office  cars. 

The  cars  are  constructed  after  standard  plans  prescribed 
bv  the  Post  Office  Department  (see  P.  O.  D.  Exhibit  2), 
aiid  provided  with  the  required  interior  fittings  by  and  at 
the  expense  of  the  railroad  company,  which  bears  also  the 
expense  and  performs  the  service  of  heating,  lighting,  and 
cleaning  the  cars  at  terminals  and  en  route  (see  P.  O.  D. 
Exhibit  1,  sec.  1314^,  par.  24). 

Under  the  law  all  new  cars  constructed  must  be  of  steel, 
and  no  cars  can  be  accepted  for  the  service  or  paid  for 
unless  of  steel  or  steel  undcrframe  construction.  (See 
P.  O.  D.  Exhibit  1,  sec.  1314i,  par.  24.) 

In  general,  the  interior  fittings  comprise  a  number  of 
upright  portable  steel  racks  in  which  pouches  and  sacks 
may'' be  hung  for  the  distribution  of  packages  of  letters 
and  circulars  and  paper  mails,  portable  distributing  tables 
being  attached  to  these  racks;  a  series  of  overhead  boxes 
above  the  paper  sacks  for  a  similar  purpose;  several  hun- 
dred pigeonhole  boxes  for  the  distribution  of  letter  mail, 
arranged  in  cases;  and  stalls  or  bins  for  piling  mails  await- 
ing distribution,  local  mails  for  delivery  in  transit  and 
registered  mail.  The  cars  are  also  provided  with  lavatory 
and  toilet  facilities  and  a  small  closet  for  the  clothing  of 
the  clerks. 

All  service,  in  a  full  postal  car,  with  the  exception  m 
some  instances  of  the  pihng  of  mail  at  initial  point  or 
delivery  at  teiminal  point,  is  performed  by  railway  postal 
clerks,  who  are  responsible  for  the  same. 

The  service  consists  in  the  receipt,  distribution,  and  de- 
liverv  of  mails  in  transit  between  termini.  All  classes  of 
maifare  handled  and  distributed,  except  that  parcel  post 
and  circular  mails  are  not  distributed  in  such  cars  to  any 
great  extent.  JMails  received  in  bulk  in  pouches  and  sacks 
are  opened  and  the  contents  separated  and  distributed  to 
smaller  units  for  delivery  to  post  offices  located  on  the  line, 
to  other  post  offices,  or  to  connecting  railway  ]K)st-office 
lines.  Part  of  the  mail  may  simply  be  rehandled  as  pack- 
ages into  other  pouches  or  sacks,  while  another  part  received 
in  packages  or  bundles  labeled  to  a  State  or  to  the  railway 
post-oflice  line  will  be  broken  and  distributed  piece  by  piece 
into  the  pigeonhole  letter  boxes  or  paper  sacks.  On  some 
lines  a  further  distribution  of  mail  for  large  cities  to  sta- 


222 

tions  or  carriers  is  made,  where  by  so  doing  a  material 
advance  in  time  of  delivery  may  ])e  a('.c;)mplislied. 

In  the  storage  stalls  or  bins  only  tlie  mail  for  distribu- 
tion, registerecl  mail,  and  made-up  mails,  destined  for  local 
deliveries,  is  customarily  stored,  all  other  made-up  mails 
being  carried  either  in  a  storage  car  or  storage  space  units 
operated  in  connection  with  the  postal  car.  (Post  Office 
Department  P^xhibit  No.  60.) 

APABTMSMT  RA.ILWAY  P3ST-0FFICE  CAR  SERVICE 
DESCRIBED. 

Service  of  this  class  consists  of  the  transportation,  hand- 
ling, distribution,  and  delivery  of  mails  en  route  of  mails 
in  30-foot  and  15-foot  apartment  railway  post-office  cars 
represented  by  portions  of  the  space  in  combination  or 
baggage  cars  of  the  lengths  indicated. 

The  service  is  essentially  the  same  as  for  full  railway 
post-office  cars  in  every  respect  as  regards  construction  and 
furnishing,  heating,  lighting,  and  cleaning  of  cars  by  the 
railroad  company,  except  that  the  law  does  not  require 
that  new  apartment  cars  shall  be  constructed  of  steel. 
The  plans  for  construction  and  interior  fittings  are  pre- 
pared by  the  Post  Office  Department.  (See  P.  O.  D.  Ex- 
hibit No.  2.) 

The  interior  fittings,  distributing  racks,  ^nd  cases  only 
differ  in  arrangement  from  those  in  full  railway  post-office 
cars,  the  same  facilities  being  furnished  in  lesser  degree. 

The  service  performed  by  railway  postal  clerks  in  apart- 
ment cars  is  practically  the  same  as  in  full  cars,  except  that 
the  distribution  is  less  general  in  character  and  is  confined 
to  a  smaller  territory,  many  apartment  car  lines  being 
confined  to  a  distribution  and  delivery  of  purely  local  mails 
and  those  for  tributary  connecting  lines. 

The  amount  of  storage  space  in  apartment,cars  is  limited 
and  the  greater  part  of  the  space  is  devoted  to  the  needs  of 
distribution,  the  primary  function  of  the  car.  Made-up 
mails  are  stored  in  storage  space  units  run  in  connection 
with  the  apartment  cars,  usually  in  the  baggage  end  of 
same  car.     (Post  Office  Department  Exhibit  No.  60.) 

CHARACTER  OF  SERVICE  PERFORMED  IN  FULL  RAIL- 
WAY POST-OFFICE  AND  APARTMENT  RAILWAY  POST- 
OFFICE  CARS. 

Mr.  Gaines  testified  on  cross-examination  as  follows: 

Question  (by  Mr.  Wood).  Post  Office  Exhibit  No.  2,  one 

of  the  two  sheets,  sets  forth  the  plans  of  v;,hat  is  known 

as  the  convertible  60-30  foot  plan  for  mail  cars.     I  will 

ask  you  if  that  sheet  giving  the  60-foot  car  and  the  30- 


223 

foot  car  is  a  fair  representation  of  the  facilities  provided 

in  the  raihvay  post-oflice  and  apartment  cars,  respectively  ? 

Answer.  That  represents  the  standard  car.     There  are 

a   number    of   cars   in   service,    however,    which    are   not 

standard. 

***** 

Question.  Now,  won't  you  please  take  up  that  60-foot 
car  there  and  describe  what  these  fittings  are,  and  w^hat  is 
the  function  of  that  car  ? 

Answer.  Well,  there  are  racks  in  which  paper  mail  is 
to  be  distributed.     The  mail  bags  are  hung  in  these  racks. 

Question.  That  is  to  say,  you  mean  the  mail  bag  is 
hung  in  a  rack  open,  and  the  railway  mail  postal  clerk 
takes  the  papers  out  of  that  bag  and  distributes  them;  is 
that  it  ? 

Answer.  He  takes  the  mail  out  of  the  bags  contaming 
matter  addressed  to  this  particular  railway  post  office  and 
distributes  that  mail  in  the  sacks  hanging  in  the  racks 
and  in  the  boxes  which  are  over  that  rack  for  the  recep- 
tion of  the  papers.  *  *  *  The  function  of  the  letter 
case  is  the  distribution  of  packages  of  letters  addressed 
to  that  line  or  to  some  other  line,  for  which  the  clerks  in 
the  railway  post  office  make  distribution. 

Question.  That  is  to  say,  they  open  the  mail  bags  just 
as  thev  would  open  them  'in  the  post  office,  and  with  the 
use  of "^ these  facilities  shown  in  the  center  of  the  car,  they 
distribute  the  mail,  whether  letters  or  papers,  and  have 
it  put  in  other  sacks  or  other  bags  for  carriage  to  some- 
where else ;  is  that  right  ? 

Answer.  Yes;  generally  addressed  to  some  other  line, 
or  made  up  for  delivery  in  direct  sacks,  as  we  call  them, 
addressed  to  some  post  office. 

Question.  *  *  *  Now,  the  other  distribution  that  is 
performed  in  that  car,  1  would  understand  to  be  of  two 
characters;  first,  the  distribution  of  mail  which  may 
come  in  in  different  sacks,  so  that  there  will  be  accumulated 
in  one  or  more  sacks  as  may  be  necessary,  mail  destined 
for  points  reached  by  the  run  of  that  particular  car;  is 
that  right  % 

Answer.  Not  necessarily  limited  to  that. 

***** 

Question.  Then,  a  third  function  is  to  provide  facilities 
for  the  distribution  into  appropriate  sacks  of  mail  destined 
beyond  the  run  of  that  car  ? 

Answer.  Yes,  sir. 

***** 
Question.  What  else  do  they  do  in  the  railway  post- 
oflice  car  ? 


224 

Answer.  They  handle  registered  matter  and  carry,  to 
any  extent  jiracticable,  made-uj)  mail.  We  propose  to  use 
that  car  to  its  capacity. 

Question.  By  ''made-up  mail''  you  mean  mail  that 
reciuires  no  further  distribution  ? 

Answer.  Yes, 

Question.  In  railway  post-office  service  ^ 

Answer.  Mail  that  has  already  l)ccn  made  up  for  final 
delivery,  or  addressed  to  a  line,  the  mail  for  which  is  not 
distributed  on  that  particular  railway  post-office  handling. 

Question.  Yes. 

Answer.  Yes,  sir. 

Question.  Now,  the  car  function  of  the  apartment  car 
is  just  the  same  as  the  function  of  the  railway  post-office 
car,  except  it  involves  the  use  of  less  space,  because  there 
is  less  mail  to  be  distributed;  is  that  right? 

Answer.  That  is  true. 

Question.  The  length  of  the  standard  railway  post-office 
car  is  60  feet,  and  the  standard  lengths  for  apartment  cars 
are  30  feet  and  15  feet;  is  that  right? 

Ans^ver.  That  is  right. 

Question.  Now,  approximately,  how  much  of  the  space 
occupied  in  a  railway  post-office  car  is  given  up  to  these 
facilities,  and  how  much  is  there  that  is  available  for  the 
actual  transportation  of  the  mail  ?  If  the  figures  are  given 
on  that  plan  I  wish  you  would  read  them  into  the  record, 
please. 

Answer.  That  is  ov,  ing  to  whether  or  not  any  particular 
car  is  used  to  its  capacity  for  distributing  purposes.  If 
we  do  not  need  all  of  the  rack  on  either  side  of  the  car  for 
the  distribution  of  mail  the  space  vacated  in  that  rack 
which  is  put  in  nonuse  position  is  used  for  the  storage  of 
mail.  Therefore,  the  storage  capacity  of  the  car,  as  I 
understand  you  had  in  mind,  varies  with  the  varying  con- 
ditions. There  is  approximately  16  feet  of  space  set 
aside  for  the  purpose  of  storage  and  available  for  no  other 
purpose  in  a  standard  60-foot  car,  the  estimated  load  being 
240  bags,  but  if  we  had  use  for  only  30  feet  of  distributing 
space  in  that  car  we  can  load  that  car  to  its  capacity 
instead  of  putting  it  in  the  baggage  car,  and,  in  fact,  make 
use  of  anv  available  space  and  not  in  use  for  the  distribu- 
tion of  mail.     (R.  139-145.) 

Answer.  *  *  *.  There  is  approximately  16  feet  of 
storage  space  in  a  60-foot  car  available.  That  is  my  recol- 
lection. 

Question  (by  Attorney  Examiner  Brown).  Did  you  not 
state  awhile  ago  that  if  you  had  a  full  distributing  force  in 
there  that  car  would  hold  two  hundred  and  some  odd  sacks  ? 


226 

Answer.  No;  1  said  the  distributing  force  liad  not  any- 
thing to  do  with  it.  If  we  had  all  racks  and  cases  in  use 
for  the  distribution  of  mail  that  we  could  carry  an  average 
of  240  sacks  in  the  storage  space  at  each  end  of  this  car, 
and  that  the  storage  of  a  60-foot  car  in  which  the  distribu- 
ting facilities  were  not  placed  was  approximately  900  sacks. 

Question  (by  Mr.  Wood).  Now,  where 

Mr.  Stewart.  Pardon  me,  Mr.  Wood.  He  means  both 
ends,  not  each  end. 

The  Witness.  Both  ends.     (R.  148.) 

Question.  *  *  *  You  spoke  of  the  240  sacks  as 
storage  mail.  Now,  is  it  not  a  fact  that  of  those  240  sacks 
probably  the  greater  part  will  be  mail  that  will  be  worked 
up  in  that  car  en  route  ? 

Answer.  That  is  so  in  a  great  many  cases. 

Question.  And  what  you  mean  to  say  is  that  if  the  dis- 
tributing facihties  are  entirely  in  use  then  this  space  at 
each  end  of  the  car  proper,  there  is  a  carriage  of  a  total 
load  of  240  sacks  ? 

Answer.  That  is  the  estimate  based  on  the  average  size 
of  the  sacks. 

Question.  And  that  includes  the  load  that  is  distributed 
in  that  car  en  route,  and  also  in  sacks  that  may  not  also  be 
distrilnited  ? 

Answer.  Not  necessarily;  no,  sir.  It  does  not  include 
the  mail  that  may  be  distributed  in  that  car  while  placed 
at  the  station  for  advance  work.  It  does  not  include  the 
mail  received  en  route  for  distribution.  You  understand 
that  that  is  the  average  amount  of  mail  that  can  be  placed 
in  these  storage  facilities  at  one  time.     (R.  148,  149.) 

Question.  And  the  proportion  of  the  space  devoted  to 
the  two  classes  is  about  the  same  in  the  apartment  car, 
not  to  go  through  them  in  detail. 

Answer.  Not  quite.  The  30-foot  car  has  a  storage 
capacity  for  129  sacks. 

Question.  How  many  feet  is  that? 

Answer.  That  is  about  seven  and  a  half  feet,  approx- 
imately. 

Question.  A  15-foot  car? 

Answer.  That  is  on  the  estimate  of  the  average  sack,  15 
sacks  to  the  linear  foot. 

Question.  And  a  15-foot  car? 

Answer.  Forty-six  sacks. 

Question.  That  would  be  about  3  feet? 

Answer.  About  3  feet  1  inch.     (R.  151,  152.) 


226 

Mr.  Gaines  testified  on  redirect  examination  as  follows 
that  the  only  function  of  a  post  office  performed  by  the 
railway  post-office  cars  is  distribution  of  mails : 

Question  (by  Mr.  Stewakt).  Mr.  Gaines,  you  testified 
generally  with  reference  to  the  character  of  the  services 
performed  in  these  railway  post-office  cars  and  likened 
them  to  a  traveling  post  office.  I  will  ask  you  if  it  is  not 
true  that  the  only  resemblance  is  with  reference  to  the 
distribution  of  mails,  and  that  they  do  not  perform  any  of 
the  other  functions  of  the  post  office  ? 

Answer.  That  is  the  only  comparison,  from  the  stand- 
point of  the  distribution  of  the  mail.     (R.  211.) 

Mr.  Knox  testified  on  direct  examination  as  follows : 

Question  (by  Mr.  Stewart).  Will  you  please  describe 
the  character  of  the  full  railway  post-office  car  and  the 
apartment  railway  post-office  car  service  ? 

***** 

Answer.  There  are  two  classes  of  railway  post-office 
service  according  to  the  common  definition,  same  being 
termed  full  railway  post-office  service,  vrhich  is  performed 
in  60-foot  distributing  cars,  and  apartment  railway  post- 
office  service,  which  is  performed  in  apartments  constructed 
in  cars,  the  latter  usually  being  60  feet  in  length.  The 
present  authorizations  for  apartment  service  are  of  two 
units,  15-foot  and  30-foot.  Railway  post-office  service 
such  as  is  performed  in  60-foot  railway  post-office  cars  is 
confined  to  the  heavier  lines  where  distribution  is  heavy 
and  separations  necessarily  are  numerous.  Generally 
speaking,  the  interior  fittings  of  both  full  distributing  cars 
and  apartment  cars  consist  of  portable  steel  racks  in  which 
pouches  and  sacks  may  be  hung  for  the  distribution  of 
letter  mail  and  packages  and  for  the  distribution  of  paper 
and  for  lower  class  mails  by  pieces.  Portable  distributing 
tables  are  attached  to  these  racks.  There  are  overhead 
boxes  along  each  side  of  the  oar  used  for  similar  purpose 
and  in  either  one  end  of  the  car  or  the  center  of  the  car 
small  wooden  or  metal  separations  or  pigeonholes  are 
installed  in  cases  for  the  distribution  of  letter  mail  by 
pieces.  The  cars  and  apartments  are  provided  with 
necessary  toilet  and  lavatory  facilities  with  closet  for 
clothing  of  clerks.     (R.  3014,  3015.) 

And  as  follows : 

Question.  Now,  you  have  shown  in  your  statements 
that  these  different  functions  are  performed  in  the  dis- 
tributing car.  Will  you  state  what  the  primary  con- 
sideration is  in  recommending  an  increase  in  distributing 
space  in  such  cars  ? 


227 

Answer.  The  distribution  space  on  line  or  train  is  author- 
ized solely  on  the  necessity  for  the  number  of  separations 
of  the  mail  necessary  to  be  made,  this  necessity  being 
determined  by  a  personal  investigation  of  the  superin- 
tendent or  chief  clerk,  the  investigation  giving  particular 
attention  to  the  nature  of  the  distribution  to  be  performed, 
and  to  some  extent  to  the  manner  of  working  mails  to  be 
distributed. 

A  heavier  volume  of  mail  on  any  line  arriving  at  a  given 
terminal  will  recpiire  a  larger  number  of  separations  than 
a  lesser  volume  in  order  that  the  mails  may  be  properly 
separated  and  not  prove  a  burden  to  connecting  lines  and 
offices.  The  quantity  of  storage  mail  to  be  handled  on  any 
particular  run  is  no  index  of  the  distributing  needs.  Hence, 
a  15-foot  distributing  apartment  may  be  emplo3'ed  and 
fully  meet  the  distributing  requirements  of  any  particular 
run,  while  in  that  same  train  it  may  be  necessary  to  author- 
ize a  30-foot  unit  of  storage  space  or  even  a  full  storage  car. 
(R.  3032,  3033.) 

Mr.  Kxox  again  testified  on  direct  examination  as 
follows: 

Question  (by  Mr.  Stewart).  Xow,  will  you  describe  the 
service  performed  in  the  railway  post-ofiice  cars  ? 

^Vnswer.  The  service  in  distributing  cars  and  apart- 
ments consists  of  the  receipt  and  distribution  and  delivery 
of  mails  in  transit  and  the  separation  of  mails  for  all  con- 
necting lines  at  junction  points  and  at  the  outward  ter- 
minal of  the  run.  The  work  is  intricate  and  requires  an 
extensive  knowledge  of  the  offices  and  railroad  lines  in  a 
large  territory  surrounding  the  local  run  of  any  particular 
car  or  apartment  which  is  in  the  service. 

Question.  These  distributing  cars  have  facilities  for  dis- 
tributing the  mails  en  route;  they  also  have  space  for 
storing  mails.  Will  you  please  describe  the  character  of 
those  two  facilities  ? 

Answer.  The  storage  space  in  these  distributing  care 
and  apartments  is  largely  used  for  the  carr^'ing  of  mails  to 
be  worked  and  for  the  carrying  of  hrst-class  and  registered 
mails  made  up  for  delivery  at  opposite  terminal,  as  well 
as  for  local  deliver}-.  The  standard  60-foot  distributing 
car  contains  612  stationary  and  84  portable  letter  separa- 
tions. Tliere  are  also  provided  234  racks  and  box  separa- 
tions for  the  distribution  of  paper  mails  and  the  pouch 
distribution  of  letter  mails. 

Question.  Will  you  please  describe  where  and  under 
what  conditions  the  30-foot  and  15-foot  apartment  cars 
are  generalh'  used  in  the  service,  and  also  state  the  number 
of  separations  in  which  the  storage  space  is  provided? 


228 

Answer.  TJiirty-foot  and  IS-foot  apartnioiits  furiiisliecl 
uiuler  loss  than"  GO-loot  (listrihiitiii<2;  authorizations  are 
designed  for  linos  re(iuiring  less  intricate  distribution  and 
a  lesser  number  of  separations  than  is  required  in  which 
60-foot  distributing  cars  are  authorized  and  used.  A 
30-foot  apartment  of  the  standard  adopted  b}^  the  depart- 
ment has  312  letter  separations  and  114  paper  separations. 
A  15-foot  apartment  is  eciuipped  with  156  letter  separa- 
tions and  46  paper  separations.     (Ji.  3030-3032.) 

Mr.  Knox  again  testified  on  direct  examination  as  follows : 

Question  (by  Mr.  Stewart).  Now,  calling  your  attention 
to  the  work  which  was  performed  by  the  railway  postal 
clerks  in  connection  with  the  distributing  cars,  will  you 
please  explain  what  that  is  ?  I  am  not  referring  now  to  the 
distribution  of  mails,  but  otherwise. 

Answer.  There  are  several  classes  of  service  to  consider. 
In  full  distributing  cars  and  in  apartment  cars  the  entire 
bulk  of  the  mail  is  handled  by  the  railway  postal  clerks.  In 
this  class  of  service  all  mails  are  taken  in  the  car  and  un- 
loaded from  the  same  at  terminals  and  en  route  by  railway 
postal  clerks,  the  company  having  been  relieved  of  any 
necessity  for  handling  mail  in  connection  with  the  move- 
ment of  these  cars,  except  on  station  platforms. 

Q.  Now,  that  service  to  which  you  refer  is  a  service  which 
comprises  the  34.16  per  cent,  the  28.78  per  cent,  and  the 
9.61  per  cent  of  the  equated  60-fo()t  car-miles,  as  shown 
on  Exhibit  51;  is  that  correct? 

A.  That  is  correct;  yes,  sir.     {R.  3048.) 

STORAGE  CAR  AND  STORAGE  SPACE  SERVICE. 
STORAGE  CAR  SERVICE  DESCRIBED. 

Storage  car  service  is  that  service  rendered  m  connection 
with  the  transportation  and  handling  of  made  up  mails  in 
bulk.  It  may  be  performed  either  m  a  car  fitted  up  with 
movable  stan  chions  through  the  medium  of  which  a  number 
of  stalls  or  C(  )mpartments  may  be  provided,  or  in  an  ordi- 
nary baggag.!  or  express  car  provided  with  no  stalls  or 
special  facilities  for  making  separations. 

The  cars  are  built  and  furnished  by  the  railroad  com- 
panies and  the  Post  Office  Department  has  not  exercised 
supervision  or  control  over  their  construction  or  fittings. 
Through  cooperation  of  the  companies,  a  number  of  roads 
have  provided  stanchioned  cars  for  this  service,  but  a  great 
many  of  the  cars  operated  in  storage  car  service  are  with- 
out these  fittings. 


229 

Storage  cars  are  operated  over  comparativelv  few  lines, 
those  bemg  the  traiiscontmental  or  other  lines  where  mails 
are  heav}'  enough  to  warrant  complete  cars  devoted  to  this 
class  of  service. 

Taking  a  typical  run  of  a  storage  car,  between  New 
York  and  Chicago,  for  instance:  in  it  would  he  piled  all 
mails  which  had  already  been  distributed  to  a  greater  or 
less  degree,  bemg  labeled  to  and  destined  for  delivery  at 
Chicago  and  pomts  beyond.  All  of  the  sacks  addressed  to 
Chicago  City  would  be  piled  m  a  stall  or  bin,  labeled 
"Chicago  City;"'  those  addressed  to  places  located  on  the 
Ime  of  the  Chicago,  Burlington  &  Qumcy  Railroad  to 
Omaha  and  connections  thereon,  would  be  piled  in  a  stall 
or  bin,  labeled  '"Chicago,  Comicil  Bluffs  and  Omaha 
K.  P.  O.;"  those  addressed  to  pomts  between  Chicago  and 
Mmneapolis  over  the  Chicago,  Milwaukee  &  St.  Paul  .T?  ail- 
way  would  be  piled  m  another  stall,  labeled  "Chicago  and 
Minneapolis  Jl.  P.  O."  (Wis.  or  Minn.,  as  the  case  may  be); 
stalls  would  probably  also  be  necessar}-  for  Milwaukee,  Wis., 
St.  Paul,  Minn.,  and  Minneapolis,  Minn.,  in  which  the  mail 
for  those  cities  would  be  piled,  and  mails  for  other  cities 
would  be  similarly  stalled  when  the  quantity  would  war- 
rant. This  car  might  be  fully  loaded  at  New  York,  in 
which  case  it  would  not  be  opened  until  it  reached  Chicago, 
or  it  might  receive  additional  mails  at  stations  en  route 
where  stops  were  made.  Paper  mails  and  parcel  post 
comprise  the  bulk  of  mail  carried  in  storage  cars,  although 
in  some  mstances,  through  made  up  pouches  are  handled 
therein. 

No  distribution  of  mails  is  made  in  a  storage  car,  beyond 
that  required  to  properl}^  stall  the  sacks  as  they  are  re- 
ceived in  the  car.  The  work  of  loading  and  stalling  is 
performed  by  employees  of  the  railroacls,  who  are  as  a 
rule  under  the  supervision  of  a  railway  postal  clerk  when  the 
storage  cars  are  run  in  connection  with  a  distributmg  car, 
or  a  postal  transfer  clerk  when  the  storage  car  is  loaded 
independently  of  a  distributing  car  at  points  where  such 
transfer  clerlvs  are  assigned.  Between  the  termini  of  the 
car  rmi,  in  the  former  case,  mails  are  sometimes  transferred 
to  the  storage  car  from  the  postal  car  at  stopping  points 
en  route,  and  vice  versa,  and  sometimes  while  train  is  in 
motion.  In  the  former  case,  railroad  employees  are  re- 
quired to  make  the  transfer;  in  the  latter  case,  postal 
employees  usually  perform  the  work,  but  in  some  cases 
the  railroads  furnish  train  porters  for  the  transfer  en 
route. 

Very  little  heat  or  light  is  required  in  storage  cars  and 
that  usually  only  at  terminals,  unless  the  car  is  one  in  which 


230 

mails  are  liandlod  at  iiitoi-modiato  points,  and  the  usual 
('leanin<r  wliich  bair^a^je  and  express  ears  reeeive  is  per- 
formed in  the  ease  of  storau;e  ears  by  tlie  employees  of  the 
railroad.      (Post  OfTiee  Department  Exliibit  No.  60.) 

PRACTICE  WITH  REFERENCE  TO  LOADING  AND  UNLOAD- 
ING MAILS  IN  STORAGE  CARS. 

Mr.  Knox  testified  on  direct  examination  as  follows: 
Question  (by  Mr.  Stewart).  What  is  the  practice  with 
reference  to  the  loading  and  unloading  of  the  mails  of  the 
full  storage  cars  ? 

Answer.  The  full  storage  cars  are  loaded  by  railway 
employees  at  initial  and  unloaded  from  same  at  outward 
terminal  by  the  employees  under  the  supervision  of  railway 
postal  clerks  or  transfer  clerks.  In  connection  with  the 
handling  of  mails  in  these  storage  cars  en  route,  however, 
the  work  is  performed  by  railway  postal  clerks  almost 
without  exception.  In  a  number  of  instances  it  is  neces- 
sary to  increase  the  number  of  railway  postal  clerks  on  a 
Ime  materially  in  order  to  repile  storage  cars  and  to  unload 
same  en  route  and  to  make  transfers  from  one  storage  car 
to  another.  Instances  of  this  sort  occur  in  practically 
all  divisions.  So  far  as  I  am  aware,  there  are  but  four 
instances  where  porters  employed  by  the  railroad  com- 
panies are  used  in  storage  cars  en  route :  One  of  these  is  in 
connection  with  service  on  the  New  York  Central  between 
Buffalo  and  Cleveland:  another  in  connection  with  service 
on  Union  Pacific  Imes  between  Sidney  and  Cheyenne; 
another  instance  in  connection  with  the  service  on  the 
Atchison,  Topeka  &  Santa  Fe  lines,  from  Albuquerque 
west  to  the  first  meetmg  point  with  train  2;  and  another 
instance  is  in  connection  with  service  on  the  Missouri, 
Kansas  &  Texas  Railway  between  Muskogee  and  Denison, 
where  a  mail  porter  is  employed  to  transfer  certain  mails 
out  of  storage  car  in  train  3  to  postal  car  before  arrival  at 
Denison,  Tex.  (E.  3049,  3050). 

REQUIREMENTS  OF  RAILROADS  AS  TO  LOADING  STOR- 
AGE CARS  SAME  UNDER  SPACE-BASIS  SYSTEM  AS 
UNDER  WEIGHT-BASIS  SYSTEM,  BUT  CARS  ARE  NOW 
LOADED  TO  AS  NEAR  CAPACITY  AS  POSSIBLE. 

Mr.  Knox  testified  on  re-direct  examination  as  follows: 

.  Question  (by  Mr.  Stewart).  You  referred  to  the  practice 

of  loacUng  storage  cars  under  this  present  system.     Is  there 

any  essential  difference  between  the  practice  now  in  vogue 

and  as  it  was  done  under  the  weight  system  ? 


231 

Answer.  The  essential  difference  is  that  we  load  the 
cars  full  or  as  nearly  full  as  possible  now,  and  we  were  not 
at  all  particular  about  it  under  the  weight  basis. 

Question.  But  so  far  as  the  recjuirements  of  the  raih-oad 
companies  are  concerned,  it  is  practically  the  same? 

Answer.  As  to  loading^  at  the  terminals;  yes,  sir. 
(R.  3190.) 

TRANSFERRING  MAIL  FROM  CAR  TO  CAR  EN  ROUTE. 

Mr.  Knox  testified  on  direct  examination  as  follows: 

Question  (by  Mr.  Stewart).  Mr.  Knox,  will  you  explain 
a  little  more  particularly  what  this  service  is  that  is  per- 
formed by  the  railwa}'  postal  clerks  in  transferring  the 
mails  from  car  to  car,  and  any  other  service  to  which  you 
refer  in  these  cars  which  they  perform  ? 

Answer.  The  mails  in  a  full  storage  car,  except  those 
loaded  to  go  tlu-ough  to  the  outward  terminal,  are  loaded 
at  the  initial  terminal  in  such  a  manner  as  to  facilitate  the 
unloading  en  route.  At  these  local  stations  and  junction 
points,  postal  clerks  enter  the  cars,  and  tm'n  the  same 
over  to  the  railway  employees  on  a  station  platform. 
These  cars  also  contain,  for  instance,  out  of  New  York 
City,  a  large  amount  of  working  paper  mails  for  the  Mddle 
West  States,  After  the  cars  leave  Pittsbm-gh,  for  in- 
stance, it  is  necessar}^  for  the  clerks,  who  go  into  the  car 
at  Pittsburgh,  to  carry,  sack  by  sack,  from  the  storage  car 
into  the  distributing  car,  all  of  these  sacks  of  mail  to  be 
handled  in  the  working  cars.  This  is  handled,  in  nine 
cases  out  of  ten,  by  a  transfer,  when  train  is  en  route,  by 
postal  clerks. 

That  covers,  I  think,  practically  all  of  the  service  per- 
formed by  clerks  en  route,  except  that  they  take  on  mails 
at  local  junction  points,  and  distribute  them  in  the  various 
separations  already  established  in  the  storage  cars. 
(R.  3050.) 

STORAGE-SPACE  SERVICE  DESCRIBED. 

Is  approximately  the  same  class  of  service  as  storage-car 
service.  It  is,  however,  performed  in  units  of  less  than 
60  feet  in  length  and  does  not  recmire  an  entire  car,  the 
service  consisting  of  the  handling  of  made-up  mails  in  part 
of  a  baggage  or  express  car,  the  remainder  of  the  car  being 
devoted  to  one  or  both  of  those  services.  Storage-space 
units  are  usually,  though  not  always,  operated  in  connec- 
tion with  full  railway  post-office  car  or  apartment-car 
service,  and  accommodate  the  made-up  mails  which  re- 
quire no  distribution  en  route,  and  in  some  cases  mails  for 


232 

(listrilmtion  which  may  he  transforred  to  the  postal  car  in 
transit.  The  character  of  the  mail  carried  in  storacre-space 
miits  is  a]>proximately  the  same  as  that  carried  in  storage 
cars,  exce])t  that  in  cases  when  snch  nnits  are  operated  in- 
de])endentily  of  a  ])ostal  car  tliere  is  likely  to  he  a  iji-eater 
quantity  of  pouch  mail  than  is  usually  carried  in  storage 
cars.  Tiie  methods  of  piling  and  handling  do  not  differ 
to  any  gi'eat  extent  from  the  methods  followed  in  storage- 
car  service,  the  loading,  stalhng,  and  delivery  heing  per- 
formed hy  railroad  em])loyees."  Postal  employees  super- 
vise their 'work  whenever  possihle,  hut  the  company  is  held 
responsihle  for  the  handling  and  deli^^ery  of  all  mails.  The 
units  of  service  autliorized  are  3  feet,  7  feet,  15  feet,  and 
30  feet.     (Post  Office  Department  Exhihit  No.  60.) 

Mr.  Gaines  testified  on  cross-examination  as  follows: 

Question  (by  Mr.  Wood).  Wliat  is  a  storage  car  and 
what  is  its  function  ? 

Answer.  A  storage  car  is  a  car  devoted  to  the  storage  of 
mails,  and  the  authorized  unit  of  a  storage  car,  the  author- 
ized size,  is  60  feet,  inside  measurement. 

Question.  When  you  say  "storage  of  mails"  you  mean  a 
car  which  is  devoted  to  the  carriage  of  mails  which  require 
no  distribution  en  route  ? 

Answer.  That  is  correct. 

Question.  They  go  tlirough  in  sacks  and  bags  from  one 
end  of  the  run  to  the  other  ? 

Answer.  Yes,  sir. 

Question.  Is  that  right  ? 

Answer.  Not  necessarily  from  one  end  of  the  run  to  the 
other.  They  may  be  taken  on  and  put  off  at  intermediate 
points. 

Question.  I  see.     What  sort  of  a  car  is  used  for  storage 

mail  ?  Till 

Answer.  Well,  a  standard  storage  car  should  be  pro- 
vided with  stanchions  approximately  2  feet  apart  for  the 
purpose  of  separating  mail  that  is  stored  in  that  car  by 
putting  mail  for  a  certain  destination  in  one  or  more  bins 
or  compartments  and  keeping  it  separate  in  that  way.  A 
great  many  cars  being  used  for  storage  purposes  are  not 
pro\'ided  at  this  time  with  stanchions. 

Question.  What  is  the  difference  between  the  equipment 
used  for  the  carriage  of  storage  mail  and  the  ordniary  bag- 
gage or  express  car  ?     Is  there  any  ? 

Answer.  The  stanchions  that  I  am  speakmg  about  con- 
stitute the  difference  between  a  proper  storage  car  and  a 
baggage  car. 


233 

Question.  And  that  is  substantial!}'  the  only  difference? 

Answer.  That  is  substantially  the  only  difference,  except 
that  a  storage  car  would  not  have  as  wide  doors  as  a  bag- 
gage car. 

Question.  Well,  a  considerable  amount  of  the  storage 
mail  is  carried  in  ordinary  baggage  cars,  is  it  not? 

Answer.  Yes,  sir. 

Question.  I  mean  full  cars  of  storage  is  carried  in  ordi- 
nary baggage  cars  ? 

Answer.  Yes,  sir. 

Question.  And  a  car  that  is  used  for  storage  mail  could 
be  used  interchangeably  for  baggage,  except  where  these 
stanchions  would  prevent  it  ? 

Answer.  Yes.  I  would  say  that  the  department  has  now 
a  plan  for  an  interchangeable  baggage  and  storage  car. 

Question.  Yes. 

Answer.  With  stanchions  that  can  be  put  in  or  taken 
out  as  the  needs  of  either  the  baggage  service  or  the  mail 
service  demand. 

Question.  Now,  there  is  another  class  of  service,  and  that 
is  the  storage  in  baggage  cars  ? 

Answer.  Yes. 

Question.  The  use  of  storage  space  less  than  60  feet — less 
than  a  full  car  ? 

Answer.  Yes. 

Question.  What  sort  of  mail  is  carried  in  that  manner  ? 

Answer.  The  same  class  of  mail  that  is  carried  in  the 
storage  cars. 

Question.  Who  makes  such  distribution  into  and  out  of 
the  storage  car  as  may  be  required  ? 

Answ^er.  The  railroad  company  is  employed  to  load 
and,  under  certain  conditions,  unload. 

Question.  Yes.  So  far  as  the  railway  post-office  car  is 
concerned,  the  railway  company  must  provide  the  station 
help  for  loading  and  unloading,  but  the  work  inside  the  car 
is  done  by  the  postal  clerks ;  is  that  right  ? 

Answer.  Yes. 

Question.  While  in  the  storage  car,  the  work  inside  the 
car  is  done  by  the  railway  employees ;  is  that  right  ? 

Answer.  Well,  not  invariably. 

Question.  It  may  be  done  by  either  ? 

Answer.  Under  certain  conditions,  we  require  our 
postal  clerks  to  supervise  the  loadhig  and  unloading  of 
mail  carried  in  either  ])aggage  or  storage  cars,  as  far  as  is 
necessary. 

Question.  Yes;  and  where  there  is  no  postal  clerk  in  the 
train,  then  it  is  handled  entirely  by  the  baggagemen? 

Answer.  It  is. 


234 

Question.  Now,  the  storage  mail  that  is  carried  in 
baggage  cars  is  carried  in  common  with  baggage  or  express, 
or  both,  provided  there  is  anything  of  that  sort  to  move; 
is  that  right  ? 

Answer.  Yes,  sir. 

Question.  In  other  words,  the  car  is  an  orchnary  baggage 
car  ? 

Answer.  Yes,  sir. 

Question.  And  it  is  utihzed  for  wliatever  business  there 
may  be  put  into  it ;  is  that  right  ? 

Answer.  That  is  true. 

Question.  Who  takes  care  of  the  mail  in  those  cars '( 

Answer.  The  baggageman  or  an  express  messenger  is 
supposed  to  do  so. 

Question.  And  what  are  the  possible  units  of  authoriza- 
tion for  storage  space  in  such  cars  ? 

AnsAver.  There  are  3,  7,  15,  and  30  foot  units. 

Question.  Yes.  Just  what  does  that  mean  ?  Take  the 
3-foot  unit.     What  does  an  authorization  of  3  feet  mean? 

Answer.  In  regard  to  the  space  or 

Question.  Yes;  in  regard  to  the  space  which  that  gives 
the  Post  Office  Department  the  right  to  use. 

Answer.  It  means  that  the  Post  Office  Department  can 
put  in  that  space  45  bags,  or  as  much  as  5  bags,  if  there  is 
no  more  excess  than  that. 

Question.  I  do  not  find  anything  in  the  statute  or  hi  the 
Postmaster  General's  petition  about  45  bags.  What  is 
that  ? 

Answer.  That  represents  3  feet  of  linear  space.  That 
estimate  is  based  upon  an  investigation  had  in  varioiis 
parts  of  the  country  to  determine  how  many  average  sacks 
could  be  loaded  in  a  linear  foot  of  space. 

Question.  Without  regard  to  that  number  of  sacks,  this 
3  feet  of  space  contemplates  3  linear  feet  of  space  on  each 
side  of  the  car  with  an  aisle  between,  does  it  not  ? 

Answer.  That  is  the  way  the  estimate  was  made. 

Question.  And  the  same  way  with  the  7,  15,  and  30  feet  ? 

Answer.  Provided  there  is  any  necessity  for  passing 
through  that  car. 

Question.  Yes.  Of  course,  if  it  is  a  full  storage  car,  I 
suppose  no  aisle  is  necessary  ? 

Answer.  No  aisle  is  necessary,  unless  there  is  necessity 
for  some  one  passing  through  it. 

Question.  But  if  it  is  used  in  common  with  other  traffic, 
and  a  passageway  is  required,  then  it  is  contemplated 
with  respect  to  each  of  those  units  that  the  department 


235 

shall  have  that  amount  of  linear  feet  on  each  side  of  the 
car,  with  an  aisle  between;  is  that  it? 

Answer.  No :  not  under  the  count.     That  is  not  necessary. 

Question.  No;  I  am  not  speaking  of  the  count. 

Answer.  But  that  is  the  basis. 

Question.  That  is  what  I  am  speaking  of.  That  is  the 
basis  ? 

Answer.  Yes,  sir. 

Question.  Now,  in  point  of  fact,  to  what  extent  is  space 
measurement  employed  in  the  administration  of  the  space 
basis  in  these  what  1  call  common  cars  ? 

Answer.  Thirty  feet  of  space  is  measured.  Below  30 
feet,  for  the  convenience  of  the  railroad  company,  we  are 
permitting  the  count  of  mail  based  upon  the  estimate  of 
15  sacks  to  the  linear  foot,  and  it  works  greatly  to  the 
advantage  of  the  railroad  company. 

Question.  Well,  did  the  railroad  company  inaugurate 
this  count  basis,  or  was  that  inaugurated  by  the  depart- 
ment? 

Answer.  It  was  inaugurated  by  the  department. 

Question.  As  a  substitute  for  the  actual  measurement  of 
space  ? 

Answer.  As  a  substitute  for  the  actual  measurement  of 
space,  and  to  avoid  the  necessity  of  marking  ofi"  space  that 
sometimes  we  would  not  need,  and  tliat  if  wc  take  the 
count  instead  of  the  measurement,  the  railroad  company, 
in  cases  where  the  mail  is  running  light,  has  the  use  of  the 
part  of  the  car  not  needed  in  that  particular  unit.  (R. 
152-158.) 

Answer.  I  believe  it  will  be  entirely  practicable  from  a 
Railway  Mail  Service  standpoint  to  have  those  units 
measured  off  in  the  baggage  cars  and  used — 3,  7,  and  15 
feet. 

Question.  But  it  is  not  done  that  way? 

Answer.  It  is  not  done  at  the  present  time  that  way. 

Question.  And  the  department  has  not  required  it  to 
be  done  that  way  ? 

Answer.  No.     (R.  165.) 

Mr.  Gaines  testified  on  re-direct  examination  as  follows: 
Question  (by  Mr.  Stewart)  .  With  reference  to  the  super- 
vision,  I  will  ask  you  whether  it  is  not  true  that  the  trans- 
fer clerk  supervises  the  loading  of    the  storage  units   at 
stations,  if  any  postal  clerk  is  on  the  train  ? 

Answer.  Where  we  have  suflicicnt  transfer  clerks,  and 
where  there  is  any  necessity  for  it,  wc  arrano;c  to  have 
them  do  that.  It  is  not  invariably  true.  Wc  can  use, 
we  find,  to  good  advantage,  postal  clerks  to  take  the  place 
of  transfer  clerks  at  points  where  they  begin  their  runs, 


236 

and  make  a  separation  of  mail  at  intermediate  points. 
In  many  cases,  we  have  no  transfer  clerks  at  even  (juite 
important  points  on  that  accomit.  We  can  get  the  super- 
vision necessary  without  those  clerks.     (K.  215.) 

THE  MANNER  OF  PILING  MAIL  IN  BAGGAGE  CARS. 

Mr.  Gaines  testified  on  cross-examination  as  follows: 

Question  (by  Mr.  Wood).  Now,  in  the  actual  adminis- 
tration of  the  servic  e,  is  the  mail  segregated  in  the  baggage 
car  into  units  of  3  feet,  7  feet,  and  15  feet,  piled  in  that 
manner  and  handled  in  that  manner? 

Answer.  I  wish  it  were,  but  it  is  not. 

Question.  How  is  it  done  ? 

Answer.  These  small  units,  for  the  convenience  of  the 
railroad  company,  are  placed  as  they  please  in  the  car. 
When  you  are  speaking  of  the  3-foot  unit,  it  is  placed  for 
the  convenience  of  the  railroad  company.  For  instance, 
the  railroad  company  may  have  express  or  baggage  to  go 
off  at  that  same  point.  There  may  be  2  or  3  sacks  to  go 
off  at  that  same  point.  The  railroad  company,  for  its  own 
convenience,  can  place  this  mail  with  the  baggage  and  with 
the  express,  and  save  space  to  devote  to  their  other  uses  in 
that  way. 

Question.  Now,  if  the  mail  were  piled  in  these  3-foot 
spaces,  would  it  be  possible  to  handle  that  mail  expedi- 
tiously in  and  out  of  the  car  at  the  stations  at  which  the 
mail  is  to  be  taken  off  and  at  the  stations  at  which  it  is 
to  be  put  on  ? 

Answer.  If  it  were  properly  loaded  by  the  baggageman, 
and  he  knew  his  business  in  regard  to  tlae  dispatch  of  that 
mail,  it  would. 

Question.  Do  you  think  you  could  load  all  of  those 
packages,  105  packages,  to  3  feet  of  space,  in  one  end  of 
the  car  in  such  a  way  that  the  baggagemen  could,  with 
dispatch,  get  each  one  of  those  packages  off  at  the  proper 
place  at  which  it  was  to  be  put  off  ? 

Answer.  Now,  I  will  say  that  that  is  an  extreme  case. 
I  do  not  believe  that  has  ever  occurred  in  the  service  since 
the  space  basis  went  into  effect.  Therefore,  it  is  theoretical, 
purely,  and  not  practical.     (R.  163-165.) 

Mr.  Gaines  testified  on  re-direct  examination  as  follows: 

Question  (by  Mr.  Stewart).  In  regard  to  the  ascer- 
tainment of  the  space  to  correspond  with  these  small- 
sized  units— 3  feet,  7  feet,  and  so  forth— you  referred  to 
the  practice  of  making  such  a  determination  upon  the 
average  number  of  sacks  carried.  I  will  ask  3'OU  whether 
or  not  it  would  not  be  entirely  agreeable  to  the  depart- 


237 

ment  if  the  railroad  conxpanies  \v()iild  make  arrange- 
ment to  segregate  thatmiuh  space  in  the  (ars  and  put 
it  at  the  departments  disposal,  so  tlat  it  might  be 
used,  instead  of  adopting  this  method,  which  seems  to 
be  to  the  convenien(e  of  both  ]>arties  ? 

Answer.  Personally,  I  would  be  very  glad  to  see  the 
space  segregated  in  all  baggage  cars  in  which  units  of  mail 
were  carried. 

Question.  But  that  would  be  entirely  practicable  from 
every  viewpoint,  would  it  not? 

Answer.  I  do  not  see  any  reason  why  it  is  not  entirely 
practicable.     (R.  211,  212.') 

Question.  Now,  with  reference  to  the  practice  referred 
to  of  carrying  these  mails  which  are  associated  Mith  these 
particular  small  units  of  space  over  the  floor  of  the  baggage 
car,  I  will  ask  you  whether  it  is  true  that  the  railroad 
companies  carry  their  express  and  baggage  in  the  same 
manner?       ' 

Answer.  I  believe  it  is. 

Question.  That  is  to  say,  they  give  the  same  treatment 
to  their  other  articles  of  transportation  that  they  do,  for 
their  convenience,  to  these  mails? 

Answer.  Yes;  and  they  encroach  on  our  space  some- 
times. 

Question.  So  it  will  be  just  as  practicable  and  ji  st  as 
reasonable  to  require  them  to  stac  k  up  their  express  and 
their  baggage  in  carrying  them  in  these  cars  as  to  require 
them  to  stac  k  up  the  mail  ? 

Answer.  I  think  so.      (R.  213,  214.) 

SEPARATION  OF  MAILS  LOADED  IN  STORAGE  CARS  AND 
STORAGE   SPACE  BY  RAILROAD  EMPLOYEES. 

Mr.  Knox  on  cross-exammation  testified  as  follows: 

Question  (by  Mr.  Wood)  .  And  you  mentioned  the  sepa- 
ration of  the  load  in  the  car.  Now,  what  is  the  nature  of 
the  separation  of  the  load  in  the  car  which  is  made  by  the 
railroad  loaders  ? 

Answer.  It  depends  entirely  upon  the  car  on  any  par- 
ticular line.    It  varies  on  all  rims  in  the  country. 

Question.  I  don't  mean  on  some  particidar  run,  but  I 
find  that  a  good  deal  of  the  nomenclature  that  is  entirely 
familiar  to  you  gentlemeii,  so  that  one  word  expresses 
everything  that  is  done,  is  not  familiar  to  me. 

Answer.  I  might  explain  that,  Mr.  Wood,  best  by  an 
example,  say. 

Question.  Yes. 

Answer.  Take  a  Great  Northern  storage  car  out  of  St. 
Paul.     A  car  is  designated  the  Washuigton   storage   car. 


238 

In  one  end  of  the  car  we  will  place  iSeattlc  mail,  direct  mail 
or  Seattle.  In  another  end,  direct  mail  for  Si)okane.  At 
another  point  in  the  car  mail  for  smaller  points  hi  Mestern 
Waslihigton.  At  another  point  hi  the  car  mail  for  smaller 
points  in  eastern  Washhigton.  And  at  some  other  place  in 
the  car  there  will  he  a  pile  of  mixed  mail  for  smaller  places 
and  which  this  railroad  man  and  even  the  Railway  Mail 
Service  men  at  wSt.  Paul  do  not  know  what  separation  to 
make,  because  they  are  too  far  away  from  Washington 
State.  That  is  an  example  of  the  way  it  is  loaded — four, 
five,  six,  or  seven  separations  made  in  the  car. 

Question.  As  I  understand  you,  then,  after  this  mail  has 
been  delivered  to  the  railroad  company  it  has  to  be  assem- 
bled into  these  separate  subdivisions  and  piled  in  the  car 
according  to  those  separations  ? 

Question  (by  Attorney  Examiner  Brown).  I  do  not 
un<lerstand  that  in  a  storage  car,  where  you  have  it  either 
full  or  part  full  of  storage  mail,  you  do  any  dropping  off  or 
takmg  on  of  the  mail  at  hitermediate  points.    Do  you  ? 

Answer.  Oh,  yes;  some  cars  are  practically  unloaded 
and  set  out  of  the  tram  before  we  reach  the  other  terminal. 

Question.  "VMio  does  that? 

Answer.  The  unloading  en  route  ? 

Question.  Yes. 

Answer.  The  postal  clerks.  The  Montana  storage  car 
m  this  same  tram  27  of  the  Great  Northern  contams  North 
Dakota  and  Montana  and  Idaho  mails.  Now,  by  the  time 
the  car  reaches  Havre,  Mont.,  the  car  is  empty  and  we  set 
it  out  there,  as  a  rule,  unless  there  is  Washmgton  mail 
placed  in  there. 

Question.  The  postal  clerks  m  distributing  the  mail,  as 
you  call  it — there  are  no  racks  for  distributing  mails. 
Does  he  ride  along  in  the  car  and  throw  out  the  mail  and 
take  it  in  as  you  go  along  ? 

Answer.  They  go  back  into  that  car  at  the  larger  sta- 
tions and  take  the  mail  out,  and,  also,  if  there  is  any 
happens  to  be  put  in  the  train,  they  take  it  in.  *  *  * 
In  nearly  every  instance  there  is  a  distributing  car  or 
cars  in  the  train.  The  clerks  go  into  the  storage  car  to  do 
this  unloading  and  to  take  on  any  mails. 

Question.  Now,  generally  speaking,  that  is  not  a  storage 
car,  is  it?  That  is,  that  is  not  what  is  usually  called  a 
storage  car.  A  storage  car  is  one  that  is  filled  at  point 
of  origin  and  runs  through  to  a  given  destination  ? 

Answer.  The  cars  originating  at  New  York  *  *  * 
largely  run  through  to  St.  Louis  and  Chicago,  but 
from  St.  Louis  and  Chicago  west  the  cars  decrease  hi  the 
loads  very  largely,  with  probably  the  exception  of  a  car 


239 

that  goes  thi-ough  to  San  Francisco  and  one  that  goes 
through  to  Portland.  The  load  is  generally  partly  un- 
loaded. Frequently  the  storage  cars  reach  the  Pacific 
coast  destination  with  only  a  half  load  in  them.  We  hare 
unloaded  a  great  deal  of  it  before  we  got  there. 

Question  (by  Mr.  Wood).  When  you  have  a  car  that 
runs  through  between  terminals  there  is  the  same  separa- 
tion in  the  loading  of  that  car,  is  there  not,  in  order  to 
to  take  care  of  the  difierent  dispositions  that  may  be  made 
of  the  mails  at  that  termhial  >  That  is,  that  that  goes 
to  one  connection  would  be  put  in  one  pile  in  one  part 
of  the  car,  and  that  that  goes  to  the  terminal  post  office 
in  another  part  of  the  car,  and  so  on. 

AnsAver.  A  car  for  Chicago  would  naturally  contain 
Chicago  mails  for  the  city  separate  from  any  connecting 
lines,  and  probably  there  would  be  some  separation  made 
of  mails  for  the  different  stations  to  go  out  of  the  car. 
If  the  car  is  entirely  unloaded,  say,  at  Chicago,  and  does 
not  go  any  farther 

Question.  What  I  am  trying  to  get  clear,  the  thing  that 
I  don't  precisely  understand,  is  as  to  the  separations  in 
cars  as  to  whicK  there  may  not  be  very  much,  if  any,  niail 
taken  out  m  the  run  of  the  car.  You  still,  in  loading 
that  car,  observe  certain  separations,  don't  you,  in  order 
that  when  that  car  reaches  the  terminal  the  mail  taken  out 
of  it  will  be  assembled  so  that  it  may  be  readily  dispatched 
on  the  next  part  of  the  journey!' 

Answer.  Yes.     There  are  separations  made. 

Question.  So  that  it  is  customary,  in  loading  storage 
cars,  to  make  those  separations  according  to  the  final 
destination  of.  the  several  subdivisions  of  the  mail  carried 
in  the  car? 

Answer.  The  only  exception  would  be  that  if  we  had 
sufficient  mail  for  the  city  of  Chicago  to  fill  the  car  we 
Avould  put  it  in  there  without  any  separation. 

Question.  Now,  in  loadmg  storage  units  in  baggage 
cars  where  there  is  less  than  a  full  storage  authorization, 
is  the  same  thing  required  ? 

Answer.  Yes. 

Question.  You  have  a  30-foot  storage  unit.  That  must 
be  separated  and  mails  assembled  according  to  their 
final  (lestination? 

Answer.  In  order  to  facilitate  the  unloading  at  the 
final  destination  and  to  get  the  early  connecting  train 
out,  those  mails,  at  least,  are  held  separate  from  the  other 
mails  that  have  a  longer  connecting  time. 


240 

Question.  And  the  same  thino;  is  true  in  connection  with 
a  15-foot  storage  unit? 

Answer.  Yes. 

Question.  Is  tlie  same  thing  true  with  respect  to  the 
7-fo()t  unit? 

Answ^n-.  When  it  gets  down  to  as  small  as  a  7-foot 
storage  unit,  as  a  rule  tiie  mail  is  turned  over  to  the  baggage- 
man and  he  uses  his  own  discretion  as  to  how  it  should  be 
handled.  I  think.      (R.  3138-3142.) 

NO  GREATER  KNOWLEDGE  REQUIRED  OF  BAGGAGE- 
MEN TO  HANDLE  MAILS  THAN  TO  HANDLE  EXPRESS. 

Mr.  Kxox  testified  on  cross-examination  as  follows: 
Question  (by  Attorney  Examiner  Brown).  Is  there  any- 
tliing  in  the  assertion  by  witnesses  for  the  railroads  here 
that  the  baggageman  has  to  fit  himself  by  study  to  deter- 
mine where  these  bags  shall  go  and  how  they  shall  be  ar- 
ranged in  liis   car? 

Answer.  I  don't  see  that  he  has  to  know  any  more  to 
handle  these  bags  than  he  does  to  handle  the  express  which 
comes  in  in  miscellaneous  lots  in  the  same  car,  provided 
that  the  baggageman  handles  the  express,  which  he  does 
on  a  great  many  of  these  runs.  The  express  is  marked  for 
delivery  at  stations  on  the  line  beyond  the  terminal.  He 
has  to  make  the  same  separation  of  it.     (R.  3162.) 

MAILS  IN   STORAGE   SPACE  UNITS  HANDLED  BY  RAIL- 
WAY EMPLOYEES,  AS  A  RULE. 

Mr.  Knox  testified  on  direct  examination  as  follows: 
Question  (by  Mr.  Stewart).  How  are  the  mails  handled 
in  baggage  authorizations  on  less  than  60-foot  authoriza- 
tions ? 

Answer.  Baggage  car  authorizations  on  less  than  60-foot 
authorizations  are  handled  as  a  rule  exclusively  by  railway 
employees.  There  are  exceptions.  It  is  noted  that  in  the 
eleventh  and  thirteenth  divisions  postal  clerks  in  certain 
trains  load  mail  in  the  storage  end  of  apartment  cars  at 
initial  terminal  in  connection  w^ith  railway  employees,  and 
in  some  instances  they  load  and  unload  mail  en  route  and 
at  the  outward  terminal.  In  this  work  clerks  are  assisted 
by  railway  employees— the  work  of  the  former  being  largely 
of  a  supervisory  or  directory  capacity.  The  handling  of 
the  storage  units  carried  in  oversize  distributing  cars  is  as 
a  matter  of  course  exclusively  in  the  hands  of  railway 
postal  clerks,  except  so  far  as  the  station  or  platform  service 
IS  concerned.     (R.  3051,  3052.) 


241 

BULK  OF  MAIL  HANDLED   IN   60-FOOT    STORAGE   CARS 
WHERE  THERE  IS  NO  OVERSIZE. 

Mr.  Brauer  testified  on  cross-examination  as  follows: 
Answer.  The  bulk  of  the  mail,  of  course,  is  hauled  in  60- 
foot  cars,  storage  mail,  where  there  is  no  oversize.     The 
30s  and  15s  are  back  on  the  side  runs,  largely,  where  the 
traffic  is  not  heavy.     (R.  3446.) 

CLOSED-POUCH  SERVICE. 

CLOSED-POUCH  SERVICE  DESCRIBED. 

Closed-pouch  service  is  the  transportation  and  handling 
of  made-up  mails  in  baggage  cars  on  trains  upon  which  no 
full  or  apartment  railway  post-office  cars  are  authorized. 
Service  of  this  class  is  entirely  in  the  hands  of  the  railroad 
company,  its  employees  loading,  handling,  and  delivering 
all  the  mails  and  being  held  responsible  therefor.  The 
mails  handled  comprise  all  classes,  letter  pouches,  paper 
sacks,  parcel-post  packages,  and  sometimes  registered  mail 
and  therein  cliffers  somewhat  from  storage  space  units  in 
which  only  paper  mails  are  principally  carried.  The  units 
of  service  authorized  by  the  law  are  of  7  feet  and  3  feet — 
both  sides  of  car.  If  more  than  7  feet  of  space  are  neces- 
sary in  a  train,  the  next  larger  unit  of  storage  space  may 
be  authorized,  but  the  service  would  be  of  the  same  charac- 
ter as  in  the  smaller  units.  (Post  Office  Department  Ex- 
hibit No.  60.) 

Mr.  Gaines  testified  on  cross-examination  as  follows: 

Question  (by  Mr.  Wood)  .  Now,  one  other  class  of  service, 
I  think,  we  have  not  as  yet  described,  and  it  is  the  closed- 
pouch  service.     What  is  that  ? 

Answer.  Closed-pouch  service  is  3  or  7  foot  units  of 
space  used  on  trains  on  which  there  is  no  railway  post- 
office  service,  no  postal  clerks  employed. 

Question.  What  is  the  difference  between  closed-pouch 
service  and  other  kinds  of  service?  What  is  the  signifi- 
cance of  the  term  "closed  pouch"? 

Answer.  Well,  closed-pouch  service  is  service — it  is  mail 
forwarded  in  closed  bags,  where  there  is  no  opening  of  the 
bag  and  no  distribution  of  it  on  the  train. 

Question.  Let  us  distinguish  the  closed  pouch  from  the 
storage  mails  in  baggage  cars.     What  is  the  difference  ? 

Answer.  As  a  rule  there  are  only  postal  clerks  on  trains 
where  there  are  units  of  baggage-car  space  of  these  small 
3  and  7  foot  unit  spaces.  There  are  postal  clerks  on  those 
trains. 


242 

Question.  What  I  am  trying  to  get  clearly  on  the  record, 
Mr.  Gaines,  is  what  significance  is  to  ])e  given  to  this  ex- 
pression "closcd-poucli  service."  Does  it  have  regard  to 
tlie  character  of  the  mail  carried  as  distinguished  from  the 
mail  that  is  carried  in  the  storage-car  service,  or  does  it 
have  reference  to  simply  the  set  of  circumstances  under 
which  it  is  carried  ? 

Answer.  Primarily,  it  doubtless  was  on  account  of  the 
fact  that  on  those  closed-pouch  trains  there  were  loaded 
pouches  containing  letter  mail  carried  as  closed  pouches, 
just  as  stated,  and  is  distinguished  from  storage  units  in 
baggage  cars  on  trains  where  there  was  railway  post-office 
service.  Primarily,  I  would  say  that  that  was  the  dis- 
tinction. 

Question.  Well,  what  does  the  term  signify  now  ?  What 
is  a  closed-pouch  route  as  distinguished  from  any  other 
kind  of  a  route  ? 

Answer.  Trains  on  which  there  is  no  railway  post-office 
service  and  where  the  units  were  3  and  7  feet. 

Question  (by  Mr.  Wood).  Now,  the  mail  is  handled  on 
the  closed-pouch  route  in  the  same  manner  in  which  it  is 
handled  in  the  storage  service  in  baggage  cars  in  authori- 
zations of  less  than  full  cars? 

Answer.  Except  for  the  fact  railway  postal  clerks  super- 
vise, give  any  necessary  supervision  to  the  loading  and 
unloading  of  storage  space,  and  do  not  to  closed-pouch 
space. 

Question.  But  they  do  not  load  or  unload  it,  and,  so  far 
as  the  manner  in  which  it  is  placed  in  the  car  and  in  which 
it  is  taken  off  and  put  on  is  concerned,  that  is  done  in  each 
case  by  the  train  baggageman  ? 

Answer.  Yes;  in  the  same  way  by  the  baggageman, 
except  that  it  is  not  necessary  for  him  to  have  the  knowl- 
edge of  dispatch  that  there  is  when  there  is  no  postal 
clerk  on  the  train. 

Question.  No;  and  when  you  say  "knowledge  of  dis- 
patch" you  mean  knowledge  of  the  location  of  the  post 
offices  to  which  these  packages  are  directed? 

Answer.  Yes. 

Question.  Where  they  should  be  put  off,  what  junctions 
they  shall  make,  etc.  ? 

Answer.  With  closed-pouch  units  of  3  and  7  feet,  the 
dispatch  is  not  at  all  comj^licated.  The  pouches  are  ad- 
dressed to  some  station  at  which  it  is  intended  that  the 
baggageman  shall  put  those  particular  pouches  off.  It  is 
true  that  on  some  of  those  trains  there  are  larger  units  of 


storage  space,  but  in  those  cases  they  are  confined,  I  be- 
lieve, at  all  times  to  either  through  dispatches  or  dispatches 
at  points  where  there  is  very  considerable,  if  not  all,  of  the 
mail  to  go  off  at  one  or  two  points.     (R.  165-168.) 

DUTIES  OF  BAGGAGEMEN  IN  HANDLING  CLOSED-POUCH 
MAILS  SAME  UNDER  WEIGHT-BASIS  SYSTEM  AS 
UNDER  SPACE-BASIS  SYSTEM. 

Mr.  Knox  on  cross-examination  testified  as  follows: 

Question  (by  Attorney  Examiner  Brown).  Now,  were 
you  division  superintendent  up  there  during  the  weighing 
period  ? 

Answer.  I  was  not  division  superintendent  when  any 
compensation  weighing  period  took  place  in  the  thir- 
teenth division;  no. 

Question.  Well,  do  you  know  about  what  the  duties  of  a 
baggageman  were  under  the  weight  basis  as  compared  with 
that  under  the  space  basis  ?     Were  they  any  difi'erent  ? 

Answer.  I  don't  think  they  were  any  different. 

Question.  He  had  to  make  the  distribution  under  tho 
weight  basis  the  same  as  he  does  under  the  space  basis  ? 

Mr.  Wood.  The  basis  of  pay  was  quite  different. 

Attorney  Examiner  Brown.  It  may  have  been. 

The  Witness.  It  was  a  different  system  of  payment. 

Question  (by  Attorney  Examiner  Brown).  Well,  the 
point  I  had  in  mind  was  that  this  distribution  of  the  mail 
by  the  baggageman  is  certainly  not  a  transportation 
service. 

Answer.  Well,  it  is  incidental  to  the  transportation  of 
the  mails.  *  *  *  It  is  not  distribution.  It  merely  con- 
sists in  putting  off  at  stations  plainly  addressed  bags  and 
taking  on  at  stations  addressed  bags.  It  does  not  involve 
the  dfstribution  of  any  mail,  as  we  speak  of  distribution. 

Question.  He  would  have  to  segregate  it  from  the  mass 
of  mail  he  has  got,  the  10  sacks  that  he  would  throw  off  at 
a  given  town. 

Answer.  Oh,  certainly. 

Question.  He  would  have  to  take  on  8  or  10  sacks,  as  the 
case  may  be,  and  put  them  in  the  proper  place  for  subse- 
quent throwing  off  ? 

Answer.  That  is  correct;  yes,  sir. 

Question.  He  did  that  under  the  weight  system  and  he 
does  it  under  the  space  system.  Is  there  any  more  of  it 
done  under  the  space  basis  than  the  weight  basis  ? 

Answer.  I  don  t  believe  there  is,     (R.  3159-3161.) 


244 

THE  WORK  REQUIRED  OF  BAGGAGEMEN  IN  HANDLING 
MAILS  IS  NOT  COMPLICATED  NOR  DOES  IT  REQUIRE 
EXPERT  KNOWLEDGE.  THEY  ARE  OFTEN  ASSISTED 
BY  THE  RAILWAY  POSTAL  CLERKS. 

Mr.  Gaines  testified  on  direct  examination  as  follows: 

Question  (by  Mr.  Stewart).  You  heard  the  testimony  of 
Mr.  Mack  with  reference  to  the  handling  of  mails  in  baggage 
cars  by  baggagemen,  especially  as  to  the  claim  that  it  was 
a  compUcated  proceeding.  Will  you  please  state  what  the 
facts  are  about  that? 

Answer.  In  baggage  cars  operated  over  lines  where  there 
is  railway  post-office  service  it  would  seem  that  in  th& 
eleventh  division  we  have  gone  much  further  than  has 
been  the  case  in  other  divisions.  We  are  sending  our 
postal  clerks  to  the  baggage  car  in  many  cases  to  unload  or 
assist  in  unloading  the  mail,  and  that  is  done  wherever 
there  is  anything  like  a  complicated  dispatch.  We  are 
having  mail  transferred  en  route  in  some  cases,  on  one  of 
the  Imes  under  Mr.  Mack's  jurisdiction  that  I  will  speak  of 
later,  where  the  local  mail  is  transferred  by  the  clerks  from 
the  baggage  car  to  the  mail  car  and  locally  served  by  them. 

We  have  another  where  we  put  the  postal  clerk  in  the 
baggage  car  between  Long  View  and  Palestine,  for  instance, 
and  he  unloads  the  mail  at  the  local  points. 

We  have  the  same  on  the  Little  Kock  &  Fort  Worth. 

We  endeavor,  as  far  as  possible,  to  have  the  local  mail 
carried  in  the  postal  cars,  and  it  is  the  rule  and  not  the  ex- 
ception that  the  mail  in  the  baggage  cars,  as  far  as  it  is 
possible  to  arrange,  is  for  important  junction  points, 
where  large  amounts  are  to  be  handled,  and  where  the 
baggage-master  can  put  it  out,  if  necessary,  and  for  through 
loading,  and  it  is  not  a  complicated  arrangement.  It  does 
not  need,  as  far  as  my  personal  knowledge  goes,  expert 
knowledge  on  the  part  of  the  baggagemen  to  handle  the 
mails  from  the  baggage  car  in  that  way. 

Question.  You  have  heard  the  testimony  of  the  depart- 
ment witnesses  upon  that  point  in  other  divisions.  Is  the 
service  in  your  division  substantially  of  the  same  character  ? 

Answer.  Well,  I  have  inferred  from  what  some  of  the 
witnesses  have  said  that  in  some  divisions  the  practice  has 
not  been  followed  to  the  extent  it  has  in  ours  of  having  the 
clerks  go  into  the  baggage  cars  to  assist  in  the  unloading 
and  loading  of  the  mail.  Just  to  what  extent  there  is  a 
difference  I  couldn't  say.  I  am  ver}^  sure  that  in  some 
divisions,  at  any  rate,  practically  the  same  arrangements 
are  made.  We  have  not  changed  at  all  from  the  rule  under 
the  weight  basis.     Although  as  a  matter  of  fact  we  could 


245 

require  the  railroad  companies'  employees  to  handle  that 
mail,  we  are  makmg  this  sacrifice,  you  might  say,  m  cer- 
tain mstances,  of  the  time  of  our  men  for  the  purpose  of 
avoiding  delay  to  the  tram  en  route. 

I  hare  specific  cases  of  full  reports  from  chief  clerks 
recently,  showing  just  what  is  being  done.  *  *  *  I  do 
not  want  it  understood  that  these  arrangements  are  in 
force  everywhere.  Circumstances  will  alter  the  case.  But 
I  do  not  believe  that  there  are  many  cases  in  the  division 
where  the  baggagemen  are  called  upon  to  make  dispatches 
of  mail  from  baggage  cars  that  are  any  more  complicated 
than  the  handling  of  the  express  matter  or  the  baggage, 
for  that  matter.     (R.  3242-3244.) 

POLICY  OF  DEPARTMENT  TO  GIVE  EVERY  ASSISTANCE 
TO  BAGGAGEMEN  HANDLING  THE  MAILS. 

Mr.  Gaines  testified  on  cross-examination  as  follows : 
Answer.  We  put  in  the  baggage  car  preferably  mail  for 
through  points,  carrying  as  far  as  it  is  possible  to  do  so, 
mail  for  local  delivery  in  the  mail  car.  We  put  in  the 
baggage  car  mail  for  important  junction  points,  where 
there  is  a  considerable  quantity  to  dispatch,  and  as  ex- 
plained previously,  we  are  rendering  active  assistance  in 
cases  where  it  is  necessary,  by  sending  postal  clerks  back 
to  aid  in  the  separation  and  dispatch  of  the  mail.  There 
may  be  some  cases  in  the  division  where  we  might  give 
further  cooperation,  but  it  has  been  my  intention,  and  it 
has  been  my  fixed  policy,  to  render  that  assistance  where- 
ever  it  was  brought  to  my  attention,  and  it  seemed  a  neces- 
sity of  the  service.  I  do"^not  believe  that  we  should  expect 
train  baggagemen  to  have  this  expert  knowledge  that  it  is 
claimed  is  necessary  in  the  handling  of  the  mail,  and  as  it 
has  come  under  my  personal  knowledge,  I  do  not  know  of 
any  case  where  that  is  true,     (R.  3350.) 

MAIL  HANDLING  BY  BAGGAGEMEN  REQUIRES  NO 
GREATER  KNOWLEDGE  THAN  THE  HANDLING  OF 
EXPRESS. 

Mr.  Gaines  testified  on  cross-examniation  as  follows: 

Question  (by  Attorney  Examiner  Brown).  Let  me  ask 
you  this:  Is  there  any  difference  between  the  treatment  of 
mail  and  the  treatment  of  ex])ress  in  that  car? 

Answer.  1  do  not  believe,  Mr.  Examiner,  that  we  are 
carrying  mail  in  baggage  cars  in  a  way  that  requires  any 
greater  knowledge  in  the  handling  of  it  than  does  the 
express. 

Question.  Now,  express  would  have  to  go  to  a  junction 
point;  express  would  liave  to  be  delivered  at  a  local  point, 
and  taken  on,  would  it  not? 


240 

Answer.  Yes;  and  we  are  furnishing  assistance  in  the 
handling  of  the  mail  that  is  not  furnished  by  any  outside 
source  in  the  handling  of  the  express.  We  are  furnishing 
expert  knowledge  on  tliat  train  all  the  time  as  far  as  I 
know,  where  it  is  necessary  for  the  proper  handling  of  that 
mail. 

Question.  I  am  inclined  to  agree  with  you,  that  where 
a  baggageman  has  to  know  about  points  on  connecting 
lines  in  the  distrihution  of  mail,  where  he  would  have  to 
have  such  knowledge  as  the  postal  clerk  has  to  have,  that 
that  is  not  a  part  of  the  railroad  business. 

Answer.  No,  sir. 

Question.  And  you  do  not  require  it  on  your  system? 

Answer.  No,  sir.  If  it  has  been  required  in  the  division, 
I  do  not  know  where  it  is.     (R.  3351,  3352.) 

THE  RAILROADS  HANDLE  THE  CLOSED  POUCHES  IN  THE 
BAGGAGE  CARS  IN  MITCH  THE  SAME  MANNER  AS 
THEY   HANDLE   BAGGAGE    AND   EXPRESS. 

Mr.  Wettling,  the  statistician  of  the  railway  mail  pay 
committee,  testified  on  cross-examination  as  follows: 

Question  (by  Mr.  Stewart)  .  You  think  they  handle  them 
just  as  they  handle  other  articles  in  the  car? 

Answer.'  Express  is  handled  very  much  that  way,  and 
so  is  baggage,  so  far  as  possible,  and  so  far  as  practical, 
within  the  limitations  of  the  space.  They  are  generally, 
as  I  would  like  to  have  said  if  I  did  not  make  it  plain, 
scattered  through  the  car  with  that  in  view,  so  far  as  the 
limits  of  the  space  will  permit. 

Question.  You  did  not  intend  to  say,  of  course,  I  assume, 
that  it  would  be  impracticable  for  the  railroad  companies  to 
place  stanchions  in  these  cars,  dividing  off  units,  stanchions, 
for  instance,  that  might  be  removable?  Could  they  fix 
3-foot  units  and  7-foot  units  in  that  way  and  pile  express 
or  mail  bags  in  that  way  ? 

Answer.  Oh,  no;  it  could  be  done,  of  course. 

***** 

Question.  Now,  as  to  conditions  under  which  the  mails 
actually  are  handled,  mails  are  often  piled  on  top  of  the 
baggage,  are  they  not  ? 

Answer.  Sometimes  they  are,  yes. 

***** 

Question.  The  way  it  is  now  operated   the  mails  and 

express  are  often  piled  together 

Answer  (interrupting).  Oh,  yes. 

Question  (continuing).  For  the  same  point? 

Answer.  Yes,  sir      (R.  1187,  1189,  1190.) 


247  ■ 

CLOSED-POUCH  SERVICE  NOT  A  DISTRIBUTION  SERVICE. 

Mr.  WoRTHixGTOX  testified  on  cross-examination  as 
follows : 

Question  (by  Mr.  Stewart).  In  discussing  the  question 
of  closed-pouch  service,  and  in  answer  to  one  of  Mr.  Wood's 
questions,  you  said  that  that  service  is,  in  effect,  a  dis- 
tribution service.  Now,  I  infer  you  do  not  mean  to  say 
that  it  is  anything  like  the  distribution  of  mails  in  cars  ? 

Answer,  ^o,  sir;  if  it  was,  it  would  cost  a  great  deal 
more  money  to  perform.     (R.  1645.) 

MAILS    IN    CLOSED-POUCH     UNITS     HANDLED     EXCLU- 
SIVELY BY  RAILROAD  EMPLOYEES. 

Mr.  Kxox  testified  on  direct  examination  as  follows: 

Question  (b}-  Mr.  Stewart).  Now.  that  leaves  the  lower 
units,  the  closed-pouch  service.  Will  you  describe  what 
that  is  ? 

Answer.  Closed-pouch  service,  which  refers  to  the 
authorizations  of  certain  units  of  space  in  trains  where  no 
railway  postal  clerks  are  employed,  is  performed  entirely 
by  employees  of  railroad  companies,  with  the  assistance  at 
times,  in  connection  with  the  pihng  of  mails  at  initial 
points,  of  transfer  clerks  or  railway  postal  clerks.  (R. 
3052.) 

DISTINCTION    BETWEEN     STORAGE-SPACE    UNITS    AND 
CLOSED-POUCH  UNITS  OF  3  FEET  AND  7  FEET. 

Mr.  Gaixes  testified  on  cross-examination  as  follows: 

Question  (by  Mr.  Wood).  It  is  a  fact  that  space  units 
in  the  law  contemplate  that  this  closed-pouch  service  to  be 
performed  by  a  train  baggageman  shall  be  confined  to  7 
feet  as  the  maximum? 

Answer.  That  was  all  that  was  provided  for  in  the  law, 
3  and  7  feet. 

Question.  And  it  is  a  fact  that  the  Post  Office  Depart- 
ment has  studiously  disregarded  that  limitation,  and 
thrown  that  same  kind  of  work,  under  the  guise  of  a  theo- 
retical storage  unit,  upon  the  railroad  companies  in  space 
in  excess  of  7  feet  all  over  the  United  States,  is  it  not? 

Answer.  It  is  doubtless  true  that  we  are  using  on  some 
lines — I  do  not  think  there  are  very  many,  but  some — 
more  than  7  feet  on  trains  in  which  there  is  no  postal 
clerk  service. 

Mr.  Stewart.  Mr.  Gaines,  observe  the  form  of  Mr. 
Wood's  questions  carefully.  You  know  his  tendency  to 
shape  them  up  in  such  a  way  as  sometimes  to  make  a 


248 

direct   answer  an  answer  which  you  do  not  understand. 
He  says,  "studiously"  avoided  or  "studiously"  construed. 

Mr.  Wood.  Well,  I  will  make  the  question  in  this  way: 

Question  (by  Mr.  Wood).  The  Post  Office  Department- 
has  deliberately,  purposely,  and  knowingly  increased  that 
service  to  be  performed  l)y  train  baggagemen  in  units  in 
excess  of  7  feet  and  running  as  high  as  30  ? 

Answer.  *  *  *  Upon  a  few  occasions,  we  are  dis- 
patching mail  in  as  much  as  a  30-foot  unit  in  a  car  in 
which  there  is  no  postal  clerk  service,  call  it  what  you  will. 
It  should  not  be  understood  that  that  is  closed-pouch 
service  as  seems  to  have  been  contemplated  in  the  law — I 
think  it  was — where  the  baggageman  would  take  on  mail, 
put  off  mail  at  stations,  and  take  on  mail.  There  is  no 
such  operation  down  there.  It  was  a  fast  through  train, 
stopping  at  a  few  places,  and  very  few  exchanges,  and  the 
mail  loaded,  and  it  is  a  necessity  to  use  that  baggage  car. 
We  do  not  want  to  delay  the  mail  which  is  there  for  dis- 
patch. It  is  mostly  through  mail,  and  we  are  not  imposing 
any  distributing  function  upon  the  baggageman  not  pro- 
vided for  elsewhere  in  another  way. 

Question.  It  is  somewhat  of  an  extension  of  the  train 
baggageman  service  beyond  that  which  is  specifically  pro- 
vided in  the  statute,  is  it  not? 

Answer.  It  was  not  specifically  provided. 

Question.  Whether  warranted  or  unwarranted  ? 

Answer.  Whether  warranted  or  unwarranted.  If  you 
will  pardon  me  for  a  suggestion,  I  think  the  closed-pouch 
units  and  the  additional  rates  for  closed-pouch  service 
were  put  in  the  law  contemplating  that  the  baggageman 
would  take  mail  on  and  put  mail  off  trains  at  local  stations, 
and  that  it  was  not  considered  that  he  would  be  required 
to  perform  such  service  to  the  extent  that  30  feet  of  space 
would  be  necessary;  neither  is  it  necessary  for  exchanges 
en  route.  Most  of  this  mail  is  through  mail.  (R.  3355- 
3357.) 

CHARACTER  OF  MAILS  CARRIED. 

CLASSES     AND    CHARACTER    OF    MAILS    DISTRIBUTED 
AND    CARRIED     IN   THE    SEVERAL   UNITS. 

Mr.  Gaines  testified  on  cross-examination  as  follows: 

Question  (by  Mr.  Wood).  In  addition  to  the  several 
classes  of  service  performed  by  the  railroad  companies, 
the  several  classes  of  matter  carried  by  the  Post  Office 
Department  differ,  do  they  not — the  several  classes  of  mail  ? 

Answer.  Yes. 

Question,  How  many  classes  are  there  ? 


249 

Answer.  Tliere  are  first,  second,  third,  and  fourth  class 
matter,  and  parcel   post,  including  the 

Question  (b}-  Mi\  Wood).  What  constitutes  first-class 
mail  ? 

Answer.  It  is  letter  mail  and  registered  mail — anything 
with  first-class  postage  on  it. 

Question.  And  second-class  mail? 

Answer.  Publications. 

Question.  And  third-class  mail? 

Answer.  Well,  that  is  miscellaneous  paper  mail. 

Question.  And  fourth-class  mail? 

Answer.  Well,  the  parcel  post  and  merchandise. 

Question.  Take  the  railway  post-office  car.  What  kind 
of  mail  does  that  carry  principally — first,  second,  third,  or 
fourth  class  ? 

Answer.  It  is  carrying  principally  for  distribution,  letter 
mail  and  paper  mail,  the  parcel  post  being  distributed 
very  largely  into  "directs"  in  either  the  large  post  offices 
or  in  the  terminal  railway  post  offices.  I  will  say  further 
than  that  that  circular  mail  is  not  distributed  in  railway 
post  offices  now,  but  in  terminals  and  large  post  offices. 

Question.  Well,  the  railway  post-office  car,  then,  carries 
principally  letter  mail  and  a  certain  part  of  the  second- 
class  mail  which  goes  to  individual  subscribers  located  on 
the  route  of  that  railway  post-office  car;  is  that  right? 

Answer.  And  to  newsdealers. 

Question.  And  to  newsdealers. 

Answer.  It  is  in  some  cases.  Well,  I  think  I  have 
answered  your  question. 

Question.  It  carries  substantially  any  parcel  post? 

Answer.  For  distribution,  no.  It  carries  the  parcel  post, 
but  not  for  distribution  on  the  trains  to  any  great  extent. 

Question.  But  what  parcel  post  it  carries  would  be 
carried  as  storage  maU  ? 

Answer.  It  would  be  carried  as  storage  mail,  either  in  the 
cars  or  the  baggage  or  storage  cars. 

Question.  What  kind  of  mail  do  the  storage  cars  carry 
principally  ? 

Answer.  Principally  parcel  post  and  made-up  mails  into 
"directs"  of  the  other  classes — newspapers,  magazines, 
catalogues,  and  all  other  miscellaneous  paper  mail. 

Question.  Will  you  say  that  the  parcel  post  predomi- 
nated in  the  storage  cars  in  your  district  ? 

Answer.  I  doubt  if  the  ptircel  post  throughout  the  dis- 
trict is  more  in  the  aggregate  than  the  other  classes  of  mail. 

Question.  Now,  in  the  baggage  cars,  what  sort  of  mail 
•do  you  carry  there  ? 


250 

Answer.  The  same  class  as  in  the  storage  cars. 

Question.  And  in  the  closed-pouch  service  ? 

Answer.  Closed  pouch  is  confined  more  to  letter  mail  and' 
to  miscellaneous  paper  mail  with  some  parcel  post.  (R. 
172-176.) 

Mr.  Gaines  testified  on  re-direct  examination  as  follows : 

Question  (bv  Mr.  Stewart).  With  reference  to  the 
character  of  the  mail  carried  in  the  storage  units,  is  it  not 
true  that  it  is  principally  paper  mail  and  parcel  post  ? 

Answer.  Principally  paper  mail,  parcel  post,  catalogues, 
and  matters  of  that  class. 

Mr.  Wood.  Wliat  is  that,  Mr.  Stewart  ? 

Mr.  Stewart.  The  character  of  mails  carried  in  storage 
units  is  principally  paper  and  parcel  post  mail. 

Question  (by  Mr.  Stewart).  Very  few  pouches  of  letters 
are  so  carried  ? 

Answer.     *     *     *     Very  few,  indeed. 

Question.  Wlien  it  comes  to  closed-pouch  service,  that  is 
different  ? 

Answer.  Yes. 

Question.  For  there  the  pouch  is  made  up  m  what  is 
called  a  ''direct"  to  a  post  office  or  to  a  connecting  line, 
and  necessarily  carries  all  classes  of  mail;  is  not  that  true  ? 

Answer.  That  is  true. 

Question.  And  it  is  also  true  that  that  class  of  service  is 
conducted  upon  lines  where  there  are  no  clerks  to  make  the 
distribution  ?  . 

Answer.  To  make  the  distribution  or  to  supervise.  (R. 
214,  215.) 

Mr.  Gaines  testified  on  re-direct  examination  that  the 
mails  move  in  greater  volume  from  north  to  south  and 
east  to  west,  as  follows; 

Question  (by  Mr.  Stewart).  You  spoke  of  second- 
class  mail— that  is,  second  class,  including  newspapers 
and  periodical  mails— as  moving  in  both  directions.  Of 
course,  I  take  it  that  you  did  not  intend  to  be  understood 
that  they  moved  in  all  directions,  east  and  west,  in  the 
same  volume  ? 

Answer.  Not  by  any  means.  The  heavy  movement,  I 
believe  I  stated  previously  in  this  case,  in  the  eleventh, 
division,  is  from  east  to  west  and  from  north  to  south.. 
(R.  215,  216.) 


251 

Mr.  Gaines  testified  on  re-direct  examination  that  parcel 
post  mails  are  not  generally  distributed  in  the  working  cars, 
as  follows: 

Question  (by  Mr.  Stewart),  Parcel  post  mail,  however, 
is  carried  in  the  storage  end  of  the  working  car,  where  it 
has  to  be  delivered  en  route;  is  not  that  true? 

Answer.  Well,  that  is  true  in  some  cases,  and  in  other 
cases  it  is  not.  It  is,  of  course,  not  true  in  all  cases  where 
there  is  so  much  of  the  parcel  post  that  it  can  not  be 
handled  there,  but  it  is  to  our  advantage,  and  we  desire 
the  parcel  post  carried  in  the  mail  car,  as  far  as  the  storage 
facilities ,  there  will  admit.  My  statement  about  the 
parcel  post  was  that  it  was  not  distributed  in  the  postal 

cars  to  any  extent. 

***** 

Question.  But  is  it  not  true  that  the  parcel  post  re- 
ceived en  route  is  distributed  ? 

Answer.  Parcel  post  received  in  mixed  sacks  is  dis- 
tributed en  route — mixed  sacks  addressed  to  the  line, 
passing  through  a  town,  and  where  the  parcel  post  is 
received.     (R.  216,  217.) 

NINE-TENTHS  OF  PARCEL  POST  CARRIED  IN  REGULAR 
AUTHORIZATIONS  AND  NO  COUNT  OF  SACKS  OR 
PIECES  INVOLVED. 

Mr.  Knox  testified  on  re-crossexamination  as  foUows: 

Question  (by  Mr.  Wood)  .  Is  it  not  a  fact  that  more  than 
half  of  the  parcel  post  in  the  United  States  is  shipped 
by  Sears,  koebuck  &  Co.  ? 

"^ Answer.  Nine-tenths  of  it  is  carried  on  regular  authori- 
zations, too,  which  does  not  involve  any  count  whatsoever. 
A  very  small  proportion  of  it  involves  count. 

Question.  Regular  authorizations  involve  the  count 
wherever  the  question  of  oversize  car  comes  in,  does  it  not? 

Answer.  Very  little  of  that  oversize  question  enters  into 
the  lines  leaving  this  plant  where  Sears,  Roebuck  «fe  Co. 
operate.  They  are  full  storage  cars,  and  full  cars  paid  for. 
(R.  3218,  3219.) 


252 
TRANSFER  CLERKS  SUPERVISE  DISPATCH  OF  MAILS. 

THE  DEPARTMENT  MAINTAINS  CLERKS  AT  THE  RAIL- 
WAY POST-OFFICE  TERMINALS  TO  DISTRIBUTE  THE 
MAILS,  AND  THE  RAILWAY-MAIL  TRANSFER  CLERKS 
SUPERVISE  THE  DISPATCH  OF  MAILS  BY  THE  TRAINS. 

Mr.  Gaines  testified  on  direct  examination  as  follows: 

Question  (by  Mr.  Stewart).  I  believe  there  is  a  branch 
house  of  Seai-s,  Roebuck  &  Co.  at  Dallas.     Is  that  correct  ? 

Answer,  Yes,  sir. 

Question.  And  special  reference  was  made  to  the  receipt 
of  mails  from  that  house  at  the  railroad  station  and  as  to 
the  condition  of  the  mails  so  received,  and  comparisons 
made  with  the  statements  regarding  the  character  of  mails 
received  from  the  mail-order  house  in  Kansas  City  at  the 
Union  Station  at  that  place.  What  have  you  to  say  in 
regard  to  those  mails  and  the  character  of  them  as  re- 
ceived? 

***** 

Answer.  Now,  I  am  not  competent  to  discuss  the 
Kansas  City  end  of  it,  but  as  Mr.  Mack  has  referred  to  the 
Dallas  situation  as  comparable  to  Kansas  City,  I  can  say, 
as  far  as  the  Dallas  situation  is  concerned,  that  he  is  en- 
tirely mistaken ;  that  I  do  not  believe  in  the  United  States 
there  is  mail  sent  down  from  a  post  office  any  better  sepa- 
rated, if  as  well,  as  it  is  at  that  point.  Sears,  Roebuck  & 
Co.  are  peculiarly  well  equipped  for  the  handling  of  the 
business.  They  have  very  large  trucks,  motor  trucks,  in 
which  something  like  400  bags  of  mail  can  be  and  are 
stored.  That  mail  is  separated  at  the  plant,  at  the  Sears, 
Roebuck  &  Co.  plant,  where  the  Post  Office  Department 
maintains  a  corps  of  clerks  for  the  purpose  of  distributing 
the  mail.  It  comes  down  separated  in  those  large  vans  for 
the  various  dispatches.  We  have  transfer  clerks  on  the 
platform  when  the  trucks  arrive,  and  the  mail  is  handled 
with  the  greatest  possible  accuracy,  regardless  of  whether 
the  railroad  company's  employees  know  where  it  goes  or 
not.  It  is  done  under  our  supervision.  In  the  first  place, 
it  is  properly  handled  in  the  plant  and  sent  down  separated 
to  trains.  We  have  trucks  there  on  which  the  mail  is 
placed,  any  mixed  loads  are  placed  under  the  direct  super- 
vision and  with  the  active  assistance,  in  the  handling,  of 
our  transfer  clerks,  and,  as  far  as  I  know,  the  fines  against 
the  railroad  company  at  Dallas  for  mishandling  of  that 
stuff  are  negligible. 

***** 

Question  (by  Mr.  Stewart).  As  I  understand  you, 
then,  Mr.  Gaines,  such  work  as  is  done  by  the  railroad  em- 


•253 

ployees — and  there  is  considerable  of  it — is  j)ractically 
supervised  by  the  emploj^ees  of  the  Kailway  Mail  Service, 
between  the  railroad  companj-'s  employees  and  whom 
there  is  the  closest  cooperation  in  all  cases  ? 

Answer.  I  think  that  is  a  fair  statement  of  the  conditions 
as  I  know  them  in  the  11th  division.     (R.  3249-3252.) 

LOADING  AND  UNLOADING  OF  MAILS. 

GENERAL  PRACTICE  WITH  RESPECT  TO  LOADING  AND 
UNLOADING  OF  MAILS. 

Mr.  Brauer  testified  on  direct  examination  as  follows: 

Question  (by  Mr.  Stewart).  You  are  familiar  with  the- 
manner  of  handling  the  mails  upon  the  trains;  that  is,  the 
division  of  work,  you  might  say,  between  the  postal  clerks 
and  the  employees  of  the  railroad  companies.  Will  you 
describe  briefly  how  the  mails  are  handled  ? 

***** 

Answer.  Well,  generally  speaking,  the  mails  going  into  a 
railway  post-ofRce  car  are  all  loaded  in  the  car  by  the  mail 
clerks.'  In  the  full  storage  cars  and  baggage  care,  the  mail 
is  handled  by  the  railroad  employee.  The  pilmg  of  it 
and  sorting  of  these  full  60-foot  care  is  generally  super- 
vised by  a  railway  mail  employee.  Tlie  unloading  of  the 
storage  care  en  route  differe.  On  some  roads,  the  railroad 
employee  does  that.  So  far  as  my  division  is  concerned, 
at  local  stations  en  route,  the  mail  clerk  takes  care  of  that, 
and  also  takes  care  of  the  loading  over  the  road.  I  think 
that  is  the  general  way  that  is  followed.  There  are  dif- 
ferent arrangements  as  to  that  with  different  railroads. 
*  *  *  As  to  the  mail  care  themselves,  that  is,  the  railway 
post-ofRce  care,  the  distributing  care,  the  mail  is  taken  in 
by  the  clerks. 

'  Question  .  (by  Attorney  Examiner  Brown).  In  both 
instances,  that  is  with  respect  to  the  railway  post-office  and 
the  mixed  car — ^that  is,  the  baggage  car? 

Answer.  Yes. 

Question.  The  station  employees  of  the  railroad  company 
bring  that  mail  up  to  the  door  ? 

Answer.  That  is  correct. 

Question.  And  in  the  one  case,  if  it  is  a  railway  post-office 
car  or  an  apart -pent  distributing  car,  the  railwa}-  mail  clerk 
receives  it  at  the  door? 

Answer.  That  is  right. 

Question.  And  in  the  other  case,  the  baggageman  re- 
ceives it  at  the  door  ? 


•2:)4 

Answer.  That  is  correct. 

Question  (by  Mr.  Stewart).  Do  the  railway  postal 
•clerks  ever  assist  the  baggageman  in  piling  and  storing  the 
mails  in  the  storage  cars  in  the  storage  units  ? 

Answer.  In  the  larger  units.  As  I  said,  in  the  60-foot 
storage  cai-s  we  generally  have  a  mail  clerk  to  supervise  it. 

Question  (by  Attorney  Examiner  Brown).  He  is  in  the 
nature  of  a  checker,  is  he  not  ? 

Answer.  Yes ;  and  helps  them  sort  it,  and  in  the  30-foot 
and  in  the  15s,  7s,  and  3s,  in  so  far  as  I  know,  the  trainman 
takes  care  of  it  alone. 

Question.  Now,  was  there  any  difference  in  the  manner 
of  handling  these  smaller  units  below  30  feet,  under  the 
weight  system  and  under  the  space  basis  ? 

jfGiswer.  Not  that  I  could  ever  notice. 

Question  (by  Mr.  Stewart).  Speaking  of  the  handling 
•  of  the  mails  which  you  referred  to  as  sorting  them,  you  do 
not  mean  any  distribution,  such  as  the  railway  postal 
clerks  made  ? 

Answer.  Oh,  no. 

Question.  Just,  in  brief,  what  is  meant  by  that? 

Answer.  Well,  I  take  it  that  it  meant  sorting  it  out  for 
the  various  stations  to  which  it  should  be  dispatched. 
Now,  I  know  that  the  baggagemen  do  do  that.  They  sort 
out  their  express  and  their  baggage  and  their  mail,  and 
pile  it  together.     A  mail  clerk  does  not  do  that. 

Question.  That  is  the  sorting  to  which  you  refer  of  the 
mails  ? 

Answer.  The  sorting  for  local  delivery. 

Question.  It  is  practically  the  same  kind  of  sorting 
service  which  the  baggageman  performs  with  reference  to 
his  baggage  and  his  express  ? 

Answer.  Yes.  (R.  2934-2937.) 

RAILWAY  POSTAL  CLERKS  PERFORM  MUCH  OF  THE 
WORK  OF  LOADING  MAILS  INTO  CARS  AND  MUCH 
OF  THE  WORK  OF  UNLOADING  THEM  FROM  CARS. 

Mr.  Gaines  testified  on  direct  examination  as  follows: 
Question  (by  Mr.  Stewart)  .  Now,  referring  to  the  claims 
that  have  been  made  with  reference  to  the  loading  and 
unloading  of  mails  at  the  local  stations  en  route,  what  have 
you  to  say  in  regard  to  that  ? 

Answer.  It  was  claimed  that  the  baggagemen  had  to 
unload  mail  at  local  stations  en  route.  I  really  have  prac- 
tically answered  that  question  in  my  previous  statement 
concerning  the  action  that  had  been  taken  in  the  eleventh 
-division^  but  I  want  it  to  be  made  clear  that  the  railway 


255 

postal  clerks  unload  all  of  the  mail  from  the  mail  cars  and 
storage  cars  except  at  terminals  of  storage  car  runs,  and 
assist  in  unloading  mail  from  baggage  cars,  at  least  in  the 
eleventh  division,  and  in  others,  I  am  sure,  wherever  it 
appears  necessary  for  them  to  do  so.  On  the  lines  that 
have  been  the  subject  of  criticism  at  important  junction 
points,  where  there  is  any  considerable  amount  of  mail  to 
unload,  our  clerks  perform  more  than  their  duty  under  the 
regulations.  In  fact,  we  have  had  some  correspondence 
with  mail  traffic  manager,  iSIr.  Mack,  in  regard  to  some  of 
his  baggagemen  refusing  to  have  anything  to  do  with  the 
unloading  of  the  mail,  and  it  was  necessary  to  inform  him 
that  if  they  did  not  cooperate  in  that  respect  it  would  be 
necessary  for  us  to  withdraw  the  assistance  which  our 
postal  clerks  were  giving.  In  some  cases  it  was  interfering 
with  the  other  duties  of  the  postal  clerks  in  the  way  of 
distribution  of  the  mail.  There  has  been  no  change  in  the 
respect  of  handling  the  mail,  as  I  stated  before,  from  what 
it  was  under  the  weight  basis.     (R.  3246,  3247.) 

SIDE  AND  TERMINAL  MESSENGER  SERVICE. 

DIFFERENCES  BETWEEN  SCREEN  WAGON  AND  MAIL 
MESSENGER  SERVICE  EXPLAINED;  BOTH  RELIEVE 
RAILROADS  OF  HANDLING  MAILS  BETWEEN  STA- 
TIONS AND  POST  OFFICES. 

Mr.  Brauer  testified  on  direct  examination  as  follows: 

Answer.  *  *  *  The  difference  between  screen-wagon 
service  and  mail-messenger  service  is  that  the  screen-wagon 
service  is  under  a  four-year  contract,  and  the  contractor 
has  to  furnish  a  bond  to  perform  the  service  for  that  length 
of  time.  In  the  messenger  service,  the  8,600  offices  that 
are  under  messenger  service,  the  Government  has  a  con- 
tract that  can  be  broken  either  way  on  30  days'  notice,  the 
messenger  or  the  Government.  That  is  practically  the 
onlv  difference.     The  work  is  about  the  same. 

Question  (by  Mr.  Stewart).  Where  this  service  is  so 
installed  and  operated,  it  reheves  the  railroad  companies 
entirely  from  the  handling  of  the  mails,  does  it  not,  excepting 
at  the  stations  ? 

Answer.  It  does. 

Question.  And  does  this  service  generally  cover  the 
transfer  between  steam  roads  ? 

Answer.  It  does. 

Question.  In  fact,  in  the  large  cities,  it  always  does, 
does  it  not? 

Answer.  It  does. 


256 

Question.  With  respect  to  90  per  cent  of  the  mails,  the 
railroad  companies  do  not  handle  them  at  all,  excepting 
upon  their  trains  and  in  connection  directly  with  their 
station  service  ? 

Answer.  That  is  right.     (R.  2926,  2927.) 

NINETY  PER  CENT  OF  THE  VOLUME  OF  MAIL  IS  HANDLED 
BY  DEPARTMENT  MAIL  MESSENGERS. 

Mr.  Brauer  testified  on  direct  examination  as  follows: 

Question  (by  Mr.  Stewart).  Mr.  Brauer,  you  heard  the  • 
testimony  of  witnesses  for  the  railroads,  particularly  the 
testimony  of  Mr.  Mack,  in  regard  to  the  handling  of  mails  • 
in  large  cities  ? 

Answer.  Yes,  sir. 

Question.  Will  you  please  state  in  what  manner  the 
mails  are  handled  in  such  places  and  at  stations  on  the 
railroads  generally,  between  the  depots  and  post  offices  ? 

Answer.  I  am  referring  only  to  the  handlmg  of  the  mails 
between  the  depots  and  post  offices,  or  between  depots. 

I  think  you  brought  up  the  question  as  to  the  handling 
of  the  mail  at  Kansas  City,  Mr.  Examiner,  and  the  answer 
was  that  it  so  happened  that  at  Kansas  Cit}^  the  Post  Office 
Department  had  a  contract  with  the  street-car  company, 
and  Dr.  Lorenz  asked  the  question  if  it  was  not  a  fact 
that  the  bulk  of  the  mail  was  handled  by  the  Post  Office 
Department,  and  my  recollection  is  that  the  answer  of  the 
witness  was  that  he  did  not  think  so. 

Now,  the  gross  receipts  of  the  Post  Office  Department 
for  the  year  1918  were  $344,000,000,  in  round  numbers. 
The  55  largest  offices,  that  is  such  offices  as  New  York, 
Chicago,  Brooklyn,  Cincinnati,  Milwaukee,  Omaha,  Jersey 
City,  Dayton,  etc.,  produced  $195,000,000  of  that.  The 
records  of  the  Third  Assistant  show  that  a  little  better 
than  80  per  cent  of  all  the  second-class  matter  and  parcel- 
post  matter  originates  in  50  of  the  largest  offices. 

Now,  at  all  of  these  55  largest  offices,  the  Post  Office 
Department  takes  care  of  the  mail.  There  is  a  list  of 
them  (handing  list  to  the  attorney  examiner). 

Then,  in  addition  to  that,  we  have  screen-wagon  service 
at  208  of  the  next  larger  offices,  and  these  offices  produce 
about  $50,000,000  of  the  gross  receipts. 

In  addition  to  these  263  offices,  where  the  department 
handles  all  the  mail  between  the  depot  and  the  post  office, 
we  have  8,600  of  the  next  offices,  making  about}  9,000 
offices,  where  the  Post  Office  handles  all  the  mail,  and . 
it  figures  up  about  90  per  cent  of  the  total. 


257 

Question  (by  Attorney  Examiner  Brown).  Tliat  is, 
your  figures,  taking  the  mail  traffic  as  a  whole — ■■ — 

Answer.  Yes,  sir. 

Question  (continuing) — are  about  90  per  cent? 

Answer.  Ninety  per  cent. 

Question.  That  is  performed  by  the  Post  Office  Depart- 
ment? 

Answer.  That  is  right.  There  are  about  53,000  offices 
over  the  entire  country.  About  33,000  of  these  are  at 
railroad  stations.  Now,  out  of  these  33,000,  there  are 
9,000  of  these  other  offices  that  produce  90  per  cent  of  the 
mail  taken  care  of  by  the  Post  Office  Department.  That 
would  leave  approximately  22,000  offices  on  railroads  that 
are  not  so  taken  care  of.  Just  how  many  of  these  post 
offices  have  no  railroad  agent,  I  do  not  know.  Out  in  my 
country,  it  would  rmi — that  is,  in  Oklahoma,  Kansas,  and 
Arizona^it  would  run  from  10  to  15  per  cent.  I  do  not 
believe  it  would  run  that  high  here  in  the  East.  But  the 
question  was  as  to  the  bulk  of  the  mail,  and  those  are  the 
facts  in  the  case. 

Question  (by  Mr.  Stewart).  You  have  not  mentioned 
anything  about  the  offices  that  produced  a  part  of  this 
remainder  of  the  revenues  which  are  located  on  star  routes 
and  away  from  the  raikoads  ? 

Answer.  Well,  those  are  included  in  the  23,000.  They 
are  all  small  offices,  of  course,  but  the  total  revenue  for  the 
33,000  and  the  bulking  in  of  all  this  amounts  to  but  10 
per  cent  of  the  whole,  and  from  that,  of  course,  should  be 
deducted  all  of  these  that  are  on  star  routes,  far  out  into  the 
country. 

Now,  some  of  these  offices  are  supplied — a  star  route  will 
start  direct  from  the  depot;  some  of  them  from  post  offices. 
It  may  start  from  the  depot,  and  the  agent  does  not  have 
anything  to  do  with  it.  If  they  start  from  the  post  office 
*  *  *,  and  the  agent  does  take  it  up  from  the  post 
office,  he  will  handle  that  in  connection  with  it.  So  I 
just  left  that  in  with  the  10  per  cent,  Mr.  Stewart. 

Question.  Have  you  a  tabulated  statement  *  *  * 
showing  these  revenues  from  various  classes  of  offices 
that  you  have  mentioned  ? 

Answer.  I  have. 

Ml-.  Stewart.  May  we  have  that  inserted  in  the  record, 
Mr.  Examiner? 

Attorney  Examiner  Brown.  Yes;  that  may  be  extended 
in  the  record. 

(The  statement  referred  to  is  as  follows:) 

122G98— 19 17 


2o8 

Terminal  messenger  service,  Government  owned  or  under  Government  con- 
tract, carrying  mails  between  depots  and  post  offices. 

GROSS    RECEIPTS. 

55  largest  offices  (all  with  Government-owned  or  con- 
tracted service) $195,  372,  601.  00 

208  next  larger  offices   (service  performed  by  depart- 

mont} 48,  920,  483.  42 

1,106  first  and  second  class  offices  (mail-messenger 
service,  Post  Office  Department  contract) 52,  409,  833. 12 

7,474  other  offices  having  department  messenger  service 
between  depots  and  post  offices — estimated  receipts. .    '  12,  000,  000.  00 

Total  at  offices  where  department  performs  all 
service  between  depots  and  post  offices ^  308,  702, 977.  54 

Total  receipts  department 344,  475,  962.  24 

Total  receipts  at  offices  where  dej^artment  ])erform8  all 
ser\4ce 308,  702,  977.  54 

Receipts  at  offices  (about  10.5  per  cent  of  the 
whole)  where  the  carrier,  to  an  extent,  per- 
forms service  between  depot  and  post  office, 
bnt  from  this  should  still  be  deducted  the 
amount  derived  from  the  20,575  offices  located 

on  star-route  service  awav  from  railroads 35,  772,  984.  70 

(R.  2921-2926.) 

THE  RULE  OF  THE  DEPARTMENT  GOVERNING  CLOSING 
HOURS  FOR  MAILS  FOR  TRAINS,  DAY  AND  NIGHT. 

I^Ir.  Brauer  testified  on  direct  examination  as  follows: 

Question  (by  Mr.  Stewart).  Did  you  hear  the  testi- 
mony of  railroad  witnesses  with  reference  to  the  closing 
hours  of  post  offices  ? 

Answer.  Yes,  sir. 

Question.  What  have  you  to  say  in  regard  to  that  ? 

Answer.  The  testimony  of  the  witness  was  to  the  effect 
that  certain  States  had  enacted  legislation  compelling  these 
depots  to  be  open  30  to  45  minutes  prior  to  train  time. 

Section  529  of  the  Postal  Laws  and  Regulations  reads: 

Mails  at  first-class  post  offices  shall  be  closed  not  more  than  one  hour, 
and  at  all  other  offices  not  more  than  half  an  hour,  before  the  schedule 
time  of  departure  of  trains,  unless  such  de])arture  is  between  the  hours  of 
9  p.  m.  and  5  a.  m.,  when  they  may  be  closed  at  9  p.  m.  At  fourth-class 
offices  day  mails  should  not  be  closed  until  it  becomes  necessary,  allowing 
a  reasonable  time  for  delivery  at  the  train  or  to  the  carrier  on  star  routes. 

3.  This  regulation  shall  not  apply  to  the  })ost  office  at  New  York  City, 
and  any  office  may  be  exempted  therefrom  by  special  order. 

»  Estimated  on  a  basis  as  if  all  of  the  7,474  offices  were  of  the  fourth  class. 
s  Fiscal  year  June  30, 1918. 


259 

Question.  Will  you  please  explain  the  significance  of 
that  rule? 

Answer.  Well,  I  do  not  know  of  any  place  that  could  not 
be  changed  where  the  agent  is  compelled  to  go  15  minutes 
before  leaving  time.  If  such  cases  exist,  they  are  arbitrary, 
and  the}'  are  wrong..  A  half  hour  leeway  is  given  them,  and 
«ven  that  can  be  changed. 

*  *  *  *  jfj 

Answer.  And  as  to  night  trains,  the  regulations  as  to  the 
small  offices,  fourth-class  offices  and  small  third-class 
offices,  are  that  the  offices  shall  be  kept  open  during  the 
ordinary  business  hours  of  the  day.  Now,  that  closes  them 
generally  at  6  o'clock,  and  as  to  the  night  mails,  there  are 
no  reasons  for  having  an  agent  on  duty  at  night  to  merely 
go  to  the  post  office  to  get  the  mail. 

Question.  How  is  the  mail  handled  under  those  circum- 
stances ? 

Answer.  At  night  offices  ? 

Question.  Yes. 

Answer.  Where  they  have  no  agent,  and  it  is  necessary 
to  dispatch  the  mails  there,  arrangements  have  been  made 
for  the.  railroad  company  to  erect  a  box  on  the  depot  plat- 
form, or  the  conductor  or  brakeman  will  throw  it  inside 
the  depot  and  take  the  mail  out  of  the  depot  and  ])ut  it  on 
the  train.  The  agent,  when  he  comes  on  duty  in  the 
morning,  delivers  it  at  the  post  office,  if  there  is  no  mes- 
senger service.  If  there  is  messenger  service,  he  carries  it 
to  the  post  office. 

Question.  Now,  how  is  the  mail  taken  from  the  post 
office  and  cared  for  under  those  circumstances  where  it  has 
to  be  dispatched  by  the  train  arriving  at  night  ? 

Answer.  At  the  closing  time  of  the  office,  they  leave  it  in 
the  depot,  place  it  in  the  depot,  providing  there  is  no  agent. 

Question  (by  Attorney  Examiner  Brown).  That  is  to 
say,  the  delivery  in  that  case  is  made  by  the  postmaster,  or 
his  clerk,  to  the  train  ? 

Answer.  No;  if  there  is  a  messenger,  the  messenger 
makes  it.  If  it  is  within  80  (R.  50.,  sic.)  rods,  the  depot 
agent  leaves  it  in  the  depot,  and  on  a  train  coming  along  at 
night  the  conductor  or  brakeman  will  get  it  out  of  the 
depot. 

Question.  And  then  the  other  mail,  the  incoming  mail,  is 
thrown  into  the  depot? 

Answer.  It  is  thrown  into  the  depot,  or,  in  some  cases, 
they  have  a  box  arrangement. 

Question  (by  Mr.  Stewart).  If  it  is  not  an  agency 
station,  how^  about  it  ? 

Answer.  The  postmaster  cares  for  it.     (R.  2927V2030.) 


•2  GO 

THE  PROVISIONS  OF  LAW  AND  REGULATION  REGARDING 
THE  CLOSING  OF  THE  MAILS  AT  POST  OFFICES. 

Mr.  Brauer  testified  on  cross-examination  as  follows : 

Question  (by  Mr.  Wood).  On  Tuesday  you  made  refer- 
ence, in  connection  with  Mr.  Mack's  statement,  as  to  the 
State  laws  and  rulings  of  railroad  commissions  requiring 
stations  to  be  kept  open  for  the  sale  of  tickets  from  30 
minutes  to  an  hour.  You  made  reference  to  some  regu- 
lation of  the  Post  Office  Department  with  regard  to  the 
closing  of  the  mails  at  post  offices.  *  *  *  I  want  to 
know  what  the  significance  of  it  is  in  this  connection,  Mr. 
Mack  having  testified  about  the  requirement  that  the  sta- 
tions should  be  kept  open. 

Answer.  Mr.  Mack  testified  in  connection  with  that,  that 
they  had  to  go  to  the  post  office  15  minutes  before  train 
time.     (K.  3452,  3453.) 

And  after  some  discussion,  again  as  follows,  after  again 
reading  Section  529  of  the  Postal  Law^s  and  Regulations: 

Question.  Well,  now,  you  mean  by  that,  that  that  rule 
of  the  Post  Office  Department  gives  the  agent  ample  time 
to  get  up  to  the  post  office  and  get  the  mail  back  to  the 
station  ? 

Answer.  My  construction  of  that  rule  has  always  been 
that  the  agent  should  have  ample  time.  It  says  as  to 
fourth-class  offices,  day  mails,  *  *  *  that  the  agent 
should  have  ample  time  to  get  the  mail  and  get  back  to  the 
depot  without  interfering  with  the  State  laws.     *     *     * 

Question.  *  *  *  What  is  the  significance  of  the  fact 
that  at  certain  post  offices  the  mails  close  an  hour  before 
train  time  and  at  certain  other  post  offices  the  mails  close 
30  minutes  before  train  time,  as  related  to  the  time  when 
the  railroad  representative  has  to  get  the  mail  ?  What  is 
the  relation  of  those  two  facts  ? 

Answer.  Well,  my  testimony  was  along  the  lines  that 
Mr.  Mack  was  mistiiken  in  the  15-minute  margin,  or  if  he 
did  have  such  cases  in  mind,  that  by  taking  them  up  with 
the  department  this  regulation  provided  *  *  *  that  he 
should  have  rehef.     (R.  3453,  3454.) 

And  again,  reading  the  statute: 

All  letters  brought  to  any  post  office  half  an  hour  before  the  time  for  the 
departure  of  the  mail  shall  be  forwarded  therein,  but  at  offices  where,  in 
the  opinion  of  the  Postmaster  General,  more  time  for  making  (up)  the 
mail  is  required,  he  may  prescribe  accordingly,  not  exceeding  one  hour 
(R.S.  3840.) 

(R.  3456.) 


2C1 

NO  COMPLAINTS  FROM  RAILROADS  RELATIVE  TO 
CARRYING  MAILS  BY  STATIONS  FOR  RETURN  ON 
ANOTHER  TRAIN;  SAME  PRACTICE  OBTAINED  UNDER 
WEIGHT-BASIS  SYSTEM. 

Mr.  Brauer  testified  on  direct  examination  as  follows : 

Question  (by  Mr.  Stewart).  Reference  has  been  made 
to  the  practice  sometimes  of  carrying  mails  by  stations 
under  certain  circumstances,  and  the  returning  of  it  on 
another  train.     Will  you  describe  what  that  is? 

Answer.  Well,  that  is  done  in  a  great  many  cases.  Pro- 
viding tlie  return  train  arrives  at  the  office  in  time  for  the 
rural  carrier,  the  mail  may  be  carried  by,  100,  150  miles, 
and  sent  back  on  a  return  train,  in  order  to  relieve  these 
night  deliveries.  That  is  done  on  application  of  the  post- 
master or  an  application  of  the  railroad  company. 

Question.  The  mails  involved  are  generally  smaU  under 
those  circumstances  ? 

Answer.  Yes,  indeed — small  amounts. 

Question.  And  the  arrangement  is  mutual? 

.Answer.  Mutual  agreement. 

Question.  Have  you  ever  known  of  any  complaints  from 
the  railroads  growing  out  of  that  practice? 

Answer.  The  carrying  of  the  mail  by  ? 

Question.  Yes. 

Answer.  Oh,  no. 

Question.  Did  they  do  that  under  the  weight  system  ? 

Answer.  Yes. 

Question.  And  they  have  continued  the  same  practice 
under  this  space  system  ? 

Answer.  Yes.     (R.  2930,  2931.) 

PRACTICE  OF  DEPARTMENT  TO  RELIEVE  INDEPEND- 
ENTLY OWNED  COMPANIES  OF  BURDENSOME  TER- 
MINAL MESSENGER  SERVICE. 

Mr.  Pettiboxe  testified  on  cross-examination  as  follows : 

Question  (by  Mr.  Stewart).  You  know,  however,  Mr. 
Pettibone,  from  your  experience  in  railway  mail  service 
that  if  that  particular  part  of  your  road  was  the  only  mile- 
age that  your  company  owned  and  operated,  the  depart- 
ment would  take  that  service  up  ? 

Answer.  I  know  instances  where  they  (R.  we,  sic)  have 
done  that  on  independently  owned  lines;  yes,  sir. 

Question.  You  know  that  that  is  the  practice,  do  you 
not? 

Answer.  Well,  I  think  that  it  can  be  stated  that  that  is 
the  practice.     (R.  2400,  2401.) 


262 

And  again: 

Question.  Now,  recurring  to  that  question  of  mail 
messenger  service.  The  examiner  askeci  you  whether  it 
was  an  invariable  rule  that  the. department  requires  the 
companies  to  perform  this  terminal  service.  You  have  had 
large  experience  in  railway  mail  service  ? 

Answer.  Yes,  sir. 

Question.  And  therefore  you  must  be  familiar  with  the 
regulations,  are  you  not? 

Answer.  I  think  I  am  reasonably  so. 

Question.  But  you  did  not  state  to  the  commission  what 
the  rule  is,  that  it  is  only  required  where  the  department 
does  not  make  other  provisions  for  it  ? 

Answ^er.  Well,  I  think  that  is  true;  yes,  sir;  having  in 
mind  the  wagon  service  and  other  service  that  is  provided 
at  the  larger  points. 

Question.  And  the  cases  where  the  department  releases 
the  company  voluntarily  upon  the  applications  of  the  com- 
panies, where  the  conditions  are  hard,  such  as  you  men- 
tioned awhile  ago. 

Mr.  Wood.  As  in  his  case,  where  you  didn't  do  it. 

Mr.  Stewart.  No;  such  as  whc^-^^  there  is  an  independent 
line. 

Answer.  Independent  lines,  I  have  known  instances 
where  they  have  been  relieved.  How  general  that  is  I 
don't  know.     (R.  2403,  2404.) 

COMPENSATING  THE  COMPANIES  FOR  PERFORMANCE 
OF  SIDE  SERVICE. 

Mr.  Knox  testified  on  cross-examination  as  follows : 
Question  (by  Mr.  Wood).  No-w,  can  you  think  of  any 
other  changes  in  the  administration  of  it  that  might  be 
brought  about,  without  too  great  disaster  to  the  Post  Office 
Department,  and  which  would  be  helpful  to  the  railroads  ? 
Answer.  Well,  another  proposition  has  been  mentioned, 
and  that  is  the  question  of  compensating  the  companies  for 
side  service.  .  (R.  3072.) 

IF  SIDE  AND  TERMINAL  SERVICE  WAS  TAKEN  OUT  OF 
THE  FIELD  OF  TRANSPORTATION  AND  PAID  FOR 
SPECIFICALLY  IT  WOULD  REMOVE  THAT  CAUSE  FOR 
IRRITATION. 

Mr.  Bradley,  general  supervisor  of  mail  traffic,  Penn- 
sylvania Railroad,  testified  on  cross-examination  as  follows: 

Question  (by  Mr.  Stewart).  *  *  *  Referring  to  your 
testimony  regarding  the  side  and  terminal  service;  of  course. 


I 


I 


263 

if  the  recommendation  of  the  railroad  and  the  recommen- 
dation of  the  department,  or  either  one,  were  followed,  that 
will  eliminate  that  question,  will  it  not,  entirely? 
Answer.  I  should  think  so.      (R.  2259,  2260.) 

DISCUSSION  OF  THE  QUESTION  OF  PAY  TO  RAILROADS 
FOR  PERFORMING  SIDE  AND  TERMINAL  MESSENGER 
SERVICE. 

The  statement  of  Mr.  Bradley  led  to  a  discussion  of  the 
subject  by  Messrs.  Wood  and  Stewart,  as  follows: 

Mr.  Wood.  What  is  it  that  I  understand  this  would 
eliminate? 

Mr.  Stewart.  It  would  eliminate  this  special  criticism 
or  the  special  deductions  that  are  drawn  with  reference  to 
side  and  terminal;  and  the  effort  has  been  made  to  show 
the  burden  of  the  side  and  terminal  service  to  the  railroads. 
Now,  as  I  take  it,  your  su2;gestion  would  correct  that,  as 
would  ours.     I  was  merely  calling  attention  to  that  fact. 

Mr.  Wood.  I  was  not  clear  "about  yours,  because  my 
understanding  of  it  was  your  proposition  contemplated 
that  the  Post  Ofhce  Department  should  determine  when  we 
should  perform  it  and  how  much  we  should  get  for  it,  and 
our  proposition  is  based  upon  the  theory  that  that  is  some- 
thing we  are  not  required  to  perform,  and  we  will  only 
perform  it  under  regulations  voluntarily  entered  into  with 
the  post  office.     Am  I  correct  in  stating  the  difference  ? 

Mr.  Stewart.  There  is  a  difference  there  which  gives 
rise  to  your  thought,  in  this,  that  in  the  Post  Office  Depart- 
ment's suggestion  the  obligation  to  perform  it  still  rests 
with  the  company,  but  the  purpose  is  to  pay  the  companies 
for  the  performance  of  the  service  where  they  do  it. 

Mr.  Wood.  To  pay  them  that  sum  which  the  Post  Office 
Department  thinks  is  right, 

^Ii'.  Stewart.  But  a  sum  which  you  pay  now  for  the 
actual  expenditures  plus  the  value  of  the  time  of  your 
employees  engaged  in  carrying  the  mail  between  two 
points. 

Mr.  Wood.  To  be  determined  by  the  Post  Office  Depart- 
ment. 

Mr.  Stewart.  To  be  determined  by  statistics  which 
shall  be  rendered,  I  should  say,  in  cooperation  with  the 
railroads.     You  could  not  get  the  information  otherwise. 

Mr,  Wood,  I  know,  but  cooperation,  as  I  undoi-stand  the 
term  "cooperation"  as  used  by  the  Post  Office  l)e])art- 
mcnt,  means  the  opportunity  of  the  railroad  com])any  to 
suggest  or  object,  but  that  the  power  of  final  decision  is  in 
the  Post  Office  Department.     Is  that  right  ? 


264 

Mr,  Stewart.  I  don't  think  you  have  hardly  stated  it 
correctly.  Of  course  where  administrative  function  rests  in 
a  public  ofFicer  he  must  finally  take  the  responsibility,  and 
he  could  not  delegate  it  to  the  railroad  companies. 

The  Witness.  I  did  not,  of  coiu'se,  mean  my  answer  to 
indorse  the  details  of  the  proposition.  I  understood  your 
question  to  be  if  that  was  taken  out  of  the  field  of  trans- 
portation service  and  paid  for  specifically,  that  it  would 
remove  that  cause  of  irritation,  and  I  agree  to  that.  (R. 
2260-2262.) 

DISTINCTION   BETWEEN   SIDE    AND    TERMINAL    SERVICE 
AND  INITIAL  AND  TERMINAL  ALLOWANCE. 

TERMINOLOGY  OF  SIDE  AND  TERMINAL  SERVICE  AND 
INITIAL  AND  TERMINAL  ALLOWANCES  DISTIN- 
GUISHED. 

During  the  direct  examination  of  Mr.  Mack,  the  following 
colloquy  ensued  between  Attorney  Examiner  Brown,  ]\Ir. 
Ashbaugh,  and  Mr.  Stewart: 

Mr.  Ashbaugh.  It  seems  to  me  that  if  at  all  times  in  this 
hearing  the  terminal  service  should  be  applied  to  something 
entirely  distinct  from  terminal  messenger  service  this 
inaccuracy  would  be  cleared  up.  Witnesses  are  constantly 
referring  in  this  hearing  to  terminal  service  when  they  do 
not  mean  that.  I  still  think  if  they  will  confine  their  mean- 
ing of  terminal  service  to  the  switching  and  the  loading 
and  unloading  in  the  terminals,  and  use  the  term  "terminal 
messenger  service"  as  applied  to  the  transportation  that 
Mr.  Mack  has  just  been  speaking  of,  there  will  be  no  con- 
fhct  of  meaning  at  aU.  I  would  suggest  the  distinction 
between  those  two  terms.  I  know  of  none  others  that 
will  be  as  useful. 

Attorney  Examiner  Brown.  I  think  that  is  a  good  sug- 
gestion. There  is  a  railroad  terminal  service — that  is, 
switching  and  loading  and  unloading — and  it  might  be  the 
duty  of  the  carrier  to  do  that.  Over  and  above  that  there 
is  a'service  which  might  be  well  called  a  messenger  service. 
If  we  keep  that  distinction  in  mind  we  will  probably  have 
no  difficulty. 

Mr.  Stewart.  Mr.  Examiner,  I  do  not  think  that  by  the 
mere  dictate  of  Mr.  Ashbaugh  you  can  change  the  termi- 
nology that  has  been  in  vogue  for  30  years.  When  the 
witnesses  come  on  the  stand  they  talk  about  things  that 
are  expressed  in  the  postal  regulations  or  stated  in  the 
reports,  and  there  has  been  no  question  at  aU  about  what 
they  mean  up  to  the  present  time. 


205 

When  we  speak  of  side  and  terminal  service  it  means  this 
service  that  Mr.  Mack  is  now  talking  of.  When  they  speak 
of  terminal  allowances  as  defined  in  this  statute  it  means 
other  service.  I  do  not  think  there  is  any  confusion  about 
it.  The  context  of  the  testimony  at  least  would  tell  us 
what  they  are  talking  about. 

Attorney  Examiner  Brown.  Probably  a  study  of  the 
testimony  will.  All  I  wanted  to  do  was  to  clear  up  and, 
if  possible,  to  mark  the  point  at  which  the  duty  of  the 
railroad  ends  and  that  of  the  department  begins.  (R. 
1735,  1736.) 

TERMINAL  RAILWAY  POST  OFFICES. 

RAILWAY  POST  OFFICE  TERMINALS  ARE  NOT  NTJMER- 
OTJS,  AND  ARE  PLACED  AT  POINTS  ALLOWING  MOST 
ECONOMICAL  HANDLING  OF  MAILS. 

Mr.  Gaines  testified  on  direct  examination  as  follows: 

Question  (by  Mr.  Stewart.)  The  relation  of  the  terminal 
railway  post  offices  to  the  mails,  to  the  distribution  of  them, 
in  cars,  and  to  the  space  system,  which  has  been  referred  to 
from  time  to  time,  and  especially  by  Mr.  Mack— how  numer- 
ous are  such  terminals  ? 

Answer.  There  are  47,  I  believe,  in  the  United  States. 
In  listening  to  the  testimony  it  struck  me  that  it  might 
appear  that  we  had  terminal  railway  post  offices  at  every 
important  junction  point,  but  that  is  not  the  case.  They 
are  comparatively  few.  They  are  put  at  what  might  be 
called  strategical  points  for'  the  purpose  of  economical 
handling  of  the  mail,  and  where  those  terminal  railway 
post  offices  are  located  it  does  cause  considerable  double 
handling  of  the  mail  on  the  part  of  the  railroad  company. 
They  take  the  mails  for  distribution  into  the  terminal,  the 
mails  are  there  distributed  and  returned,  and  the  transfer 
to  and  from  the  terminal  has  to  be  performed  by  the  rail- 
road company's  employees.  But  it  was  not  a  fact,  and  of 
course  Mr.  Mack  did  not  state  anything  about  the  number 
of  them— it  is  not  a  fact  that  the  number  of  railway  post 
offices  is  great. 

Question.  So  that  any  inference  that  might  be  drawn 
from  the  testimony  that  this  additional  work  was  very 
largo  in  volume  because  the  number  of  terminal  railway 
post  offices  is  large,  would  be  unwarranted  from  the  fact  ? 

Answer.  I  think  so. 

Question  (by  Mr.  Wood).  Would  the  witness  say  what 
percentage  of  mail  is  handled  in  terminal  railway  post 
offices  ? 


266 

Answer.  I  could  not  say  that;  no,  sir. 

Question.  They  are  at  all  large  stations,  are  they  not  ? 

Answer.  Not  at  all  large  stations.  In  fact  we  have  some- 
terminal  railway  post  ofhces  where  the  distribution  is  very 
small  indeed. 

Question  (by  Attorney  Examiner  Brown).  How  many 
have  vou  got  in  vour  division  ? 

Answer.  I  have  six.     (R.  3247-3249.) 

SPACE  STATISTICS. 

[See  file  of  department  forms  and  instructions  for  reporting  space  (Post 
Office  Department  Exhibit  No.  27).] 

INSTRUCTIONS  CONCERNING  REPORTS  OF  CERTAIN  OPER- 
ATIONS  OF   SPACE. 
JOINT  INSTRUCTIONS  OF  DEPARTMENT  AND  RAILWAY 
MAIL      PAY      COMMITTEE      TO       SECURE      UNIFORM 
REPORTS  AND  NOT  BINDING  AS  TO  TREATMENT  OF 
RESULTS. 
]VIr.  McBride  testified  on  cross-examination  as  follows: 
Question  (by  Mr.  Wood).  *     *     *     And  these  instruc- 
tions, which  were  put  out  by  the  railway  mail  pay  commit- 
tee over  its  name, to  the  railroads  as  instructions  to  the  rail- 
roads, were  the  jomt  product  of  this  committee,  consisting 
of  the  representatives  of  the  Post  Office  Department,  the 
representatives  of  the  railway  mail  pay  committee,  and 
the  representative  of  the  Interstate  Commerce  Commission ; 
is  not  that  right  ? 

Answer.  They  were  put  out  as  a  guide  for  reportmg 
these  statistics,  but  with  the  express  reservation  on  the 
part  of  the  Post  Office  Department  *  *  *  —that  they 
would  reserve  the  right  to  treat  the  various  classes  of 
space  as  they  considered  proper.  They  did  not  acquiesce 
in  the  justness  of  claiming  that  space  should  go  to  the 
mail  service.      (R.  515,  516.) 

INSTRUCTIONS  UNDER  WHICH  THE  RAILROADS  RE- 
PORTED SPACE. 

Mr.  McBride  testified  on  cross-examination  as  f oUows : 

Answer.  Those  were  the  instructions  sent  out  by  the 
railroad  committee  to  that  effect,  if  I  recall  them  correctly. 

Question  (by  Mr.  Wood).  And  those  instructions  were 
joined  in  by  the  Post  Oflrice  Department? 

Answer.  They  were  accepted  by  the  Post  OfEce^  Depart- 
ment. 


267 

Question.  They  were  approved  ? 

Answer.  They  were  approved  as  a  method  of  reporting- 
this  space. 

Question.  They  were  worked  out  jointly  by  the  Post 
Office  Department  and  the  railroad  committee,  were  they 
not? 

Answer.  Tliey  were  worked  out  jointly  to  this  extent, 
that  we  agreed  to  permit  the  raih-oads  to  report  the  space 
if  they  wanted  to.  "We  offered  no  objection  to  any  way 
they  wished  to  report  this  space,  but  we  expressly  reserved 
the  right  to  handle  that  space  in  the  way  that  we  thought 
was  proper,  after  it  was  received.     (R.  442.) 

RAILROADS  INSISTED  ON  EXCESS, UNAUTHORIZED,  AND 
TJNTJSED  SPACE  CLAIMS  BEING  REPORTED  IN  THE 
MANNER  PRESCRIBED  BY  THE  INSTRUCTIONS  AC- 
QUIESCED IN  BY  THE  POST  OFFICE  DEPARTMENT 
FOR  STATISTICAL  PURPOSES  ONLY. 

J^Ir.  McBride  testified  on  re-direct  examination  as  follows : 

Question  (by  Mr.  Ste^vart)  .  Reference  was  made  to  the 
instructions  sent  out  by  the  railway  mail  pay  committee,  by 
railroad  counsel,  as  the  joint  product  of  the  railroads,  the 
department,  and  the  Interstate  Commerce  Commission.  I 
will  ask  you  whether  it  is  not  true  that  those  instructions,  so 
far  as  they  are  concerned  in  this  particular  inquiry,  were 
prepared  by  the  railway  mail  pay  committee,  insisted  upon 
by  them,  in  order  that  the  reports  might  show  fully  the 
nature  of  the  claim  they  deshe  to  make,  and  were  acqui- 
esced in  by  the  Post  Office  Department  for  that  purpose, 
and  for  that  purpose  only  ? 

Answer.  The  pamplilet  of  instructions  was  prepared  by 
the  committee  on  railway  mail  pay.  In  that  pamphlet  of 
instructions  there  are  various  instructions  that  went  out 
from  the  department,  and  are  so  cited  in  that  pamplilet  of 
instructions  as  emanating  from  the  Post  Office  Depart- 
ment. This  pamplilet  was  issued  after  the  conclusion  of 
the  conferences  between  the  various  interests,  at  which  all 
of  these  matters  were  thrashed  out,  and  it  was  finally  agreed 
upon  to  report  the  data  in  the  form  in  which  the  final 
blanks  and  instructions  were  prepared. 

Question.  Wliat  I  am  calling  your  attention  to  particu- 
larly is  the  nature  of  those  instructions  with  reference  to 
this  particular  thing  we  are  talking  about  now,  the  report- 
ing of  excess  space,  excess  operation,  etc. 

Answer.  Those  points  were  insisted  upon  by  the  railway 
mail  pay  committee. 

Question.  And  were  acquiesced  in  by  the  department  for 
the  sole  purpose  of  enabling  them  to  have  tliat  data  and 


26S 

tabulate  it  and  present  it  to  the  Interstate  Commerce 
Commission  ? 

Answer.  Tliat  is  absolutely  correct. 

Question.  With  no  purpose  upon  the  representatives  of 
the  department  that  the,y  would  be  bound  by  the  theories 
of  the  railroad  companies  in  that  matter? 

Answer.  That  is  right. 

Question.  And  that  we  would  have  the  privilege  of  pre- 
senting to  the  commission  anything  with  reference  to  that 
tabulation  and  those  reports,  with  our  views  concerning 
them  ? 

Answ^er.  Correct.     (R.  532-534.) 

INSTRUCTIONS  OF  RAILWAY  MAIL  PAY  COMMITTEE 
OUTLINED  METHOD  OF  REPORTING  INFORMATION 
LEAVING  CONCLUSIONS  TO  BE  WORKED  OUT  BY  EACH 
SIDE. 

Mr.  McCahan  testified  on  cross-examination,  as  follow^s: 

Question  (by  Mr.  Stewart).  Mr.  McCahan,  you  referred 
to  the  reports  which  were  made  by  your  system  upon 
forms  prepared,  and  you  said  that  they  were  made  in 
accordance  with  instructions.  Do  you  refer  to  the  manner 
in  which  the  specific  items  were  entered  in  the  different 
columns  of  the  reports  ? 

Answer.  I  refer,  Mr.  Stewart,  to  the  fact  that  we  en- 
deavored to  comply  as  strictly  as  possible  with  the  construc- 
tions laid  down  on  the  forms;  jes,  sir;  as  well  as  the  instruc- 
tions issued  by  the  committee  of  railway  mail  pay. 

Question.  And  the  purpose  of  following  those  instruc- 
tions was  to  report,  as  specifically  as  possible,  all  of  the 
movements  of  these  cars  authorized  and  unauthorized — 
is  not  that  correct  ? 

Answer.  In  order  to  get  a  correct  statement  of  the 
service. 

Question.  So  that  the  department  might  have  the  exact 
figures  showing  the  operation  of  the  authorized  space — 
is  that  right  ? 

Answer.  Of  the  authorized  space. 

Question.  And  that  the  reports  might  show  otherwise 
all  operation  of  space  that  might  be  in  controversy? 

Answer.  Yes,  sir;  to  show  the  character  of  space  that 
was  moved. 

Question.  So  that  the  purpose  of  the  instructions  and 
the  reports  on  the  forms  was  that  all  the  facts  that  might 
be  relevant  in  any  aspect  of  the  case  might  be  presented 
to  the  commission  ? 

Answer.  I  think  that  is  correct. 


2G'J 

Question.  And  the  instructions  which  you  refer  to  were 
only  to  that  effect,  and  did  not  bind  either  party  as  to  any 
manner  in  which  these  several  statements  of  operation 
should  be  used? 

Answer.  It  is  my  understanding,  Mr.  Stewart,  that  the 
instructions  would  outline  the  method  of  reporting  the 
information,  and  that  the  conclusions  would  be  worked 
out  by  each  side.     (R.  2494,  2495.) 

AUTHORIZATIONS  OF  SPACE  A  BETTER  GUIDE   TO   SPACE 
USED  THAN  MEASUREMENTS  BY  RAILROAD  EMPLOYEES. 

THE  DEPARTMENT  FELT  THAT  IT  SHOULD  7  OT  BE  DE- 
PENDENT ON  OPINIONS  OF  RAILROAD  EMPLOYEES 
IN  THE  CARS  FOR  MEASUREMENT  OF  MAIL  SPACE 
WHEN  THE   AUTHORIZATION  WAS  A  GUIDE. 

Mr.  McBride  testified  on  cross-examination  as  follows: 
Question  (by Mr.  Wood).  The  railroad  companies  wanted 
to  have  the  space  in  the  mixed  cars  reported  with  respect, 
not  to  the  authorized  space,  but  the  space  actually  used 
for  the  mail,  whether  more  or  less  than  the  authorization, 
and  to  have  the  space  for  the  baggage  reported  in  accord- 
ance with  the  actual  space  used  for  the  baggage,  and  the 
same  for  the  express.     Is  not  that  right  ? 

Answer.  On  what  you  construe  to  be  the  actual  space, 
yes. 

Question.  That  was  their  suggestion,  with  respect  to  the 
mixed  car,  was  it  not,  that  the  men  in  those  mixed  cars 
should  determine  the  actual  amount  of  space,  irrespective 
of  the  authorization,  whether  more  or  less,  and  report 
that,  and  do  the  same  with  the  baggage  and  the  mail — is 
not  that  true  ? 

Answer.  I  think  that  is  your  companies'  original  claim  ? 
Question.  And  the  reason  it  was  not  done  was  because 
the  Post  Office  Department  refused  to  permit  it  to  be  done 
in  that  way,  but  joined  in  this  study — is  not  that  right? 

Answer.  "^  I  would  not  want  to  give  my  recollection  on 
that.  My  recollection  is  a  little  faulty  there.  I  do  not 
remember  that  particularly. 

Question.  But  the  Post  Office  Department  did  object 
to  having  the  space  in  the  mixed  cars  reported  upon  the 
basis  of  the  actual  used  space  in  each  kind  of  traffic,  did 
it  not,  and  insist  that  the  space  devoted  to  the  niail  should 
be  reported  simply  in  terms  of  the  authorized  space, 
irrespective  of  the  relation  of  the  authorized  space  to  the 
used  space  ? 

Answer.  We  claimed  that  authorized  space  covered  the 
used  space. 


270 

Question.  And  you  doclinod  to  bo  a  party  to  any  in- 
structions or  any  forms  which  would  direct  the  repre- 
sentatives in  the  field  to  report  the  used  space  instead  of 
the  authorized  space,  so  far  as  the  mail  was  concerned? 

Answer.  We  (lid  not  feel  that  we  should  be  dependent 
upon  the  opinions  of  the  men  in  the  cars  as  to  what  they 
thought  w^as  the  used  space,  when  we  had  an  authoriza- 
tion to  go  by  as  a  guide. 

Question.  So  there  is  one  place  in  which  the  instructions 
as  put  out  were  not  the  product  of  the  Railway  Mail  Pay 
Committee,  acquiesced  in  by  the  Post  Office  Department, 
but  were  the  result  of  the  position  taken  by  the  Post  Office 
Department;  is  not  that  right? 

Answer.  Those  instructions  were  the  result  of  a  long 
series  of  conferences  between  all  the  parties  interested. 
All  of  these  matters  were  threshed  out  at  that  time,  and 
the  instructions,  as  they  came  out,  were  the  result  of  those 
conferences. 

Question.  They  were  the  joint  product  of  that  con- 
ference of  these  several  parties  ? 

Answer.  The  joint  product.     (R.  517-519.) 

CONTROVERSY  AS  TO  UNUSED  AND  UNAUTHORIZED 
SPACE  WOULD  HAVE  REMAINED,  IF  ACTUAL  SPACE 
USED  BY  MAILS  HAD  BEEN  REPORTED. 

Mr.  McBride  testified  on  cross-examination  as  follows: 
Question  (by  Mr.  Wood).  So  that  in  this  particular  mat- 
ter wliich  you  are  now  criticizing,  if  the  railroads  had  been 
permitted  to  issue  these  instructions  in  the  way  they 
wanted  to,  and  if  those  reports  were  made  in  the  manner 
they  wanted  to  have  them,  we  would  not  have  had  this 
controversy  ? 

Answer.  I  think  we  would,  because  they  still  would  have 
reported  all  of  this  unauthorized  and  unused  operation 
over  mileage  where  the  mails  are  not  carried,  and  return 
movements.     (R.  520.) 

CONTROVERSY  WOULD  NOT  HAVE  BEEN  ELIMINATED 
IF  ACTUAL  SPACE  HAD  BEEN  REPORTED  IN  THE 
MAIL  SERVICE,  AS  RAILROADS  WOULD  STILL  HAVE 
CLAIMED  THE  UNAUTHORIZED  AND  UNUSED  SPACE. 

Mr.  McBride  testified  on  cross-examination  as  follows: 
Question  (by  Mr.  Wood).  Now,  this  whole  question  of 
baggage-car  space  to  wliich,  as  I  see  it,  you  have  directed 
most  of  your  testimony,  represents  a  controversy  that  could 
have  been  entirely  elimuiated  if  the  Post  Office  Depart- 
ment had  been  willing  to  have  the  mail  treated  as  the  bag- 


271 

gage  and  express  was  to  be  treated,  and  the  space  actually 
occupied  reported,  whether  more  or  less  than  the  author- 
ized space.     Is  not  that  so? 

Answer,  I  don't  think  so,  because  my  view  is  that  the 
railroads  would  still  hare  msisted  on  reporting  this  un- 
authorized and  unused  space  m  connection  with  mail 
movements. 

Question,  But  so  far  as  the  actual  occupation  of  the  car 
is  concerned  tliis  controversy  would  have  been  entireh' 
removed  if  the  Post  Office  Department  had  been  willing  to 
agree  that  m  connection  with  the  mixed  car  we  should 
report  the  space  actually  occupied  by  each  of  the  several 
classes  of  traffic,  whetheV  m  connection  with  the  mail  the 
space  occupied  was  more  or  less  than  the  authorized  space  ? 

Answer,  I  thmk  I  just  answered  that  c|uestion,  Mr. 
Wood. 

Question.  I  am  not  saying,  sir,  that  there  might  not  have 
been  claims  with  respect  to  the  unauthorized  and  the 
authorized,  but  I  say  that  with  respect  to  this  ciuestion,  as 
to  the  actual  occupation  of  the  car,  all  of  this  controversy 
would  have  been  removed  if  the  Post  Office  Department 
had  given  its  consent  to  that  suggestion  of  the  railroads. 

Answer.  I  can  not  concur  in"  that,  because  controversy 
would  still  have  existed  as  to  unauthorized  or  miused  space. 

Question.  But  the  controversy  would  have  been  entii'ely 
over  a  ciuestion  of  application  and  not  over  a  question  of 
fact? 

Answer.  If  the  companies  had  reported  the  exact  space 
used  in  each  of  the  services  as  they  did  in  the  express,  it 
would,  of  course,  have  narrowed  down  the  controversy  to 
some  extent,  I  think  possibly,  but  there  still  would  have 
existed  this  large  amount  of  unauthorized  and  unused 
space,  for  notwithstandmg  the  fact,  their  proposition  to 
report  the  actual  used  space  was  coupled  up  still  with  this 
unauthorized  and  unused  space  with  the  mail. 

Question.  But  it  would  have  given  to  the  commission  m 
addition  to  all  this  discussion  about  unauthorized  and 
authorized  a  report  as  to  the  actual  use  of  the  car;  but  the 
only  reason  that  we  have  not  got  that  report  is  ])ecause  the 
Post  Office  Department  would  not  allow  it  to  be  made. 
That  is  right,  is  it  not? 

Answer.  We  felt  that  placmg  the  measurement  of  the 
space  of  the  mails  in  so  many  thousand  different  hands,  in 
the  baggagemen,  that  we  would  not  get  very  accurate 
reports.  Of  course,  we  had  to  accept  those  measurements 
on  the  baggage  and  express,  having  no  way  to  check  it, 
but  we  did  have  as  a  basis  for  the  mail  space  the  authorized 


272 

space,  and  it  seemed  to  us  that  in  that  case,  having  a  gauge 
for  that  space,  even  though  in  some  cases  it  was  probably 
considerably  in  excess  of  the  space  actually  occupied,  yet 
it  was  felt  by  the  department  that  the  authorized  space 
should  be  reported  in  the  mail  service  instead  of  the  actual 
space  occupied  by  that  service,  measured  by  the  baggage- 
man.    (R.  3920-3922.) 

THE  SPACE  WAS   FULLY  MEASURED   BY  THE  AUTHORIZA- 
TIONS. 

MAIL  AUTHORIZATIONS  FULLY  MEASURED  THE  SPACE 
OCCUPIED  BY  THE  MAILS  AND  WAS  LIBERAL. 

Mr.  McBride  testified  on  re-direct  examination  as  follows: 

Question  (by  Mr.  Stewart).  *  *  *  Now,  with  refer- 
ence to  the  reporting  of  the  mails  on  the  basis  of  the  authori- 
zations, I  will  ask  you  to  state  whether  the  authorizations 
were  made  upon  observation  and  experience  and  the 
judgment  of  the  postal  officials,  whose  duty  it  was  to 
handle  the  mails  that  were  to  be  carried  in  such  author- 
ized spaces? 

Answer.  That  is  true. 

Question.  So  it  must  be  presumed  fairly  that  these 
authorizations  fully  measured  the  space  occupied  by  the 
mails  ? 

Answer.  Correct. 

Question.  Have  you  any  information  as  to  whether  that 
measurement  was  a  liberal  one  ? 

Answer.  I  have.  I  would  invite  attention  to  Exhibit 
No.  55,  which  shows  for  certain  selected  railroad  companies, 
and  representing  average  conditions,  the  maximum  and 
minimum  number  of  sacks  and  pouches  in  a  car  at  any  one 
time,  carried  in  units  of  storage  space  and  closed  pouch 
space  during  the  week  of  April  12  to  18,  1917,  reported  by 
the  railroad  companies  on  Form  R,  M.  P.  No.  6.  In  this 
we  have  shown  for  a  number  of  companies  in  different  parts 
of  the  country  the  maximum  and  minimum  number  of 
sacks  in  a  car  at  any  one  point  on  various  trains  on  various 
routes  of  those  companies,  and,  as  well,  showing  cases  in 
which  emergency  space  was  authorized. 

Question.  Now,  what  does  that  show,  in  brief  ? 

Answer.  It  shows  that  in  a  great  many  cases,  a  number  of 
sacks,  very  much  less  than  the  unit  adopted,  was  carried 
in  those  units  of  space.     (R.  535,  536.) 


273 

EXCESSIVE  CLAIMS  MADE  BY  THE  RAILROADS  CHARGE- 
ABLE TO  THE  MAILS  IN  THEIR  REPORTS  OF  SPACE 
OPERATED. 

SIXTY-FOOT  RAILWAY  POST  OFFICE  CAR  SERVICE, 

(A)  THE  RAILROADS  CHARGED  TO  THE  MAILS  ALL  EX- 
CESS OVER  AUTHORIZATION  OF  60-FOOT  RAILWAY 
POST  OFFICE  CARS,  IN  THE  SAME  MANNER  AS  IN 
OTHER  CAR  CASES. 

Mr.  Wettlixg  testified  on  cross-examination  as  follows: 

Question  (by  Mr.  StEwart).  Now  let  us  take  up  the 
question  of  the  full  railway  post  office  cars.  And  I  refer 
first  to  those  cases  that  fall  under  the  classification  of  excess 
over  authorized  length.  That  mileage  is  tabulated  in 
column  2  of  Post  Office  Department  Exhibit  48,  and  I 
assume  that  it  is  covered  also  in  one  or  the  other  of  these 
subdivisions  of  your  car-miles  excess  over  authorization,  I 
believe  ? 

Answer.  Yes,  sir;  under  column  4  for  the  35  days  and 
under  column  5  for  the  30  days,  opposite  the  letter  N, 
down  the  line. 

Question.  Now,  practically  everything  you  have  said  in 
regard  to  the  storage  car,  so  far  as  it  relates  to  oversize^ 
applies  to  this  car,  does  it  not  ? 

Answer.  Pretty  much  so;  yes,  sir,  excepting,  however, 
that  it  was  my  understanding  that  for  the  most  part  the 
70-foot  cars  in  the  case  of  the  railway  post  office  were 
built  with  the  full  consent  of  the  Post  Office  Department^ 
and  recognized  as  a  special  service. 

Question.  That  is,  you  understood  that  there  were 
certain  cars  which  were  constructed  by  some  of  the  rail- 
roads, 70  feet  in  length,  under  permission  of  the  Post 
Office  Department  ? 

Answer.  Yes,  sir;  under  the  permission.  I  guess  I  went 
too  far  when  I  said  "agreement,"  or  if  I  used  a  word  so> 
strong  as  that. 

Question.  And  that  so  far  as  you  now  know  is  the  only 
thing  that  differentiates  these  cars  or  this  class  of  cases  as 
arises  under  the  operation  of  these  cars  from  the  storage 
car  proposition  that  we  have  discussed  ? 

Answer.  Yes.     (R.  1247,  1248.) 

Question  (by  Mr.  Stewart).  Let  us  take,  to  illustrate, 
this  class  of  claim — the  case  of  the  New  York  Ceutial  full 
railway  post  office  on  route  107560.  Assuming  that  these 
facts  be  correct — and  I  am  predicating  my  question  uj^on. 

122698—19 18 


274 

that — there  was  a  car  61  feet  long,  and  the  total  full  rail- 
way post-office  car — excess  operation  shown  for  such  cars 
on  that  route  was  643,388  miles. 

Answer.  Car-foot  miles  for  the  35  days.  Yes,  sir;  that 
s  right. 

Question.  That  was  charged  entirely  to  the  mails? 

Answer.  It  was,  completely. 

Mr.  Wood.  And  3^ou  tliink  that  extra  1  foot  in  ttiat  car 
ought  to  have  been  charged  to  the  passenger?  Is  that 
right  ? 

Mr.  Stewaet.  Under  this  ascertainment  we  have  charged 
it  to  passenger. 

Question  (by  Mr.  Stewart).  Now,  Mr.  Wettling,  is  it  not 
true  that  the  department  never  made  any  plans  for  a 
61-foot  car? 

Answer.  I  never  saw  any,  Mr.  Stewart. 

Question.  And  if  the  New  York  Central  built  a  61-foot 
car  and  operated  it,  it  certainly  was  for  their  own  con- 
venience and  at  their  own  instance? 

Answer.  I  can  not  conceive  of  just  what  the  reason  was. 
I  am  not  able  to  tell  you. 

Question.  Your  opinion  is,  is  it  not,  that  it  did  not  grow 
out  of  any  requirement  of  the  Post  Office  Department  ? 

Answer.  Oh,  I  assume  not — not  any  more  than  the 
building  of  a  59-foot  and  11-inch  car  that  you  spoke  of 
the  other  day.     (R.  1249,  1250.) 

Question.  Now,  referring  to  description  under  A,  we 
have  there  as  related  to  this  particular  inquiry,  full  railway 
post-office  car  was  authorized  between  points  A  and  B, 
was  run  by  the  railroad  company  beyond  the  authorized 
distance  between  B  and  C.  This  excess  operation  was 
tabulated  and  all  charged  to  the  mails? 

Answer.  You  are  referring  now  strictly  to  full  railway 
post-office  cars  ? 

Question.  Full  railway  post  office. 

***** 

Question.  Now  you  charged  all  of  that  to  the  mails? 

Answer.  Yes,  sir. 

Question.  And  the  only  reason  you  have  for  that  is  the 
same  reason  that  you  have  given  with  reference  to  the 
charging  of  this  other  space  under  similar  conditions? 

Answer.  That  is  the  same  reason  as  given  for  the  full- 
storage  car  where  it  was  carried  beyond  the  point,  where 
the  controversy  probably  was  because  of  the  question 
whether  or  not  it  was  a  division  point  for  that  purpose,  or 
to  meet  an  authorization  in  the  return  direction  on  the 
next  day,  or  something  of  that  nature. 


276 

Question.  Now,  you  are  speaking  of  a  supposititious 
case?  You  do  not  know  that  any  of  those  cases  were  of 
the  latter  class  ? 

Answer.  I  don't  know  it;  no,  sir.  We  have  got  it  tran- 
scribed here  as  covering  anything  of  that  nature.  (R.12ol, 
1252.) 

Question.  Now,  refer  to  the  operation  classified  under  B 
on  the  Post  Office  Department  Exhibit  No.  47,  where  the 
full  railway  post-office  car  was  authorized  six  or  less  times 
a  week,  but  the  company  ran  the  car  on  other  days  of  the 
week.  Now,  that  excess  operation  was  charged  to  the 
mails  entirely  ? 

Answer.  Yes,  to  the  extent  of  71,252  (car-foot  miles) 
<R.  feet,  sic). 

Question.  And  you  have  no  other  reason  for  that  than 
the  reason  you  have  given  in  regard  to  the  other  operations  ? 

Answer.  None;  no,  sir. 

Question.  It  is  practically  the  same. 

Answer.  Yes,  sir. 

Question.  Was  not  this  operation  substantially  the  same 
under  the  weight-basis  system  as  under  the  space-basis 
system  ? 

Answer.  I  think  so. 

Question.  It  was  ? 

Answer.  Except  that  it  was  more  extended  under  the 
weight  basis,  as  I  understand  it.  That  is,  there  have  been 
considerable  reductions  of  car  mileage  in  60-foot  railway 
post-office  cars — 20  per  cent,  for  instance,  between  Novem- 
ber 1,  1916,  and  April,  1918. 

Question.  As  representing  the  authorizations  of  the  Post 
Office  Department  to  take  care  of  the  service,  if  desired  ? 

Answer.  Yes,  sir.  That  is  what  I  assume,  of  course. 
(R.  1252,1253.) 

Question.  Before  leaving  the  full  railway  post-office  cars, 
I  would  like  to  call  your  attention  to  this  case  as  illustrating 
some  of  the  excess  falling  under  this  general  description. 

This  was  an  operation  on  the  Panhandle  &  Santa  Fe 
Railroad  between  Newton,  Kans.,  and  Amarillo,  Tex.,  and 
Clovis,  N.  Mex.  There  was  a  60-foot  car  authorized  be- 
tween Newton  and  Canadian.  On  this  particular  route  it 
began  at  Oklahoma-Texas  State  line  and  ran  to  Canadian, 
28  miles.  A  30-foot  authorization — the  authorization  was 
changed  at  Canadian  to  a  30-f()ot  authorization,  and  con- 
tinued 98  miles  to  Amarillo,  where  the  authorization  was 
entirely  discontinued,  but  the  com])any  carried  the  60-foot 
•car  on  from  Canadian  to  Amarillo,  and  beyond  Amarillo  103 
miles  to  Clovis.  There  was  in  the  same  train  an  authori- 
zation of  7-foot  closed  pouch  on  train  117,  and  a  3-foot 


276 

closed  pouch  on  train  114,  in  return,  in  eflFect  between! 
those  points,  and  the  forms  show  that  the  company  car- 
ried this  mail  so  authorized  in  those  closed-pouch  units  in 
the  mixed  car,  not  in  this  railway  post-office  car,  which  ran 
wholly  empty  between  Amarillo  and  Clovis  and  also  in 
return  empty.  The  60-foot  car  was  claimed,  as  I  say,  clear 
through  and  return,  making  an  excess  authorization  claim 
of  433,000  car-foot  miles.  At  Canadian  the  time  between 
arrival  and  departure  was  10  minutes,  at  Amarillo  it  was 
25  minutes,  at  both  points  giving  ample  time  to  change 
cars.  You  charged  all  of  that  excess  operation  to  th© 
mails,  did  you  not? 

Mr.  Wood.  I  should  like  to  ask  Mr.  Stewart  what  is  the 
basis  of  his  statement  that  10  minutes  and  25  minutes  gave 
ample  time  to  change  the  cars  ? 

Question  (by  Mr.  Stewart).  I  will  modify  my  statement 
and  say  that  the  time  at  Canadian  was  10  minutes  and  the 
time  at  Amarillo  was  25  minutes. 

Attorney  Examiner  Browx.  There  is  a  Harvey  dining 
station  at  Amarillo. 

Mr.  Stewart.  Let  the  conclusion  be  drawn  from  that 
fact  by  anyone  that  is  familiar  with  the  operation. 

Question  (by  Mr.  Stewart).  I  am  asking  you,  Mr. 
Wettling,  whether  you  did  not  charge  to  the  mails  that 
entire  operation. 

Answer.  You  say  it  was  a  full  railway  post-office  car  ? 

Question.  Yes,  sir. 

Answer.  The  entire  amount  charged  against  full  railway 
post-office  cars  here  for  excess  space  is  212,100  car-foot  miles- 
(R.  cubic  feet,  sic).  I  can  not  see  how  that  could  contain 
the  433,000  in  excess  space.  If  you  desire,  I  shall  be  glad 
to  tell  you  how  I  think  so  much  of  it  as  was  proper  was 
transcribed,  or  the  manner  in  which  it  was  transcribed  inta 
the  returns  of  the  Santa  Fe  Railroad.  I  can  not,  of  course,, 
hope  to  follow  all  these  things  out  in  detail  and  have  them 
all  in  mind.  I  have  a  few  of  these  things  transcribed,  but 
to  tell  you  the  operation  of  any  particular  train  exactly 
would  be  simply  rmpossible.  You  realize  that,  of  course- 
Question.  Oh,  yes. 

Answer.  I  can  tell  you,  though,  from  the  theory  as  tch 
how  we  would  probably  have  done  that.  If  I  do  not  follow 
you  right  in  the  measurements  that  were  referred  to  there 
either  as  to  mileage  or  space,  I  wish  you  would  correct  me, 
because  that  is  rather  a  long  question,  and  I  have  not  the 
most  vivid  memory  in  the  world. 

My  understanding  is  that  from  Canadian  to  Amarillo,  98 
miles,  the  car  which  had  up  to  Canadian  been  a  60-foot  car,. 


was  reduced  to  30-foot,  running  to  Amarillo  from  Canadian, 
at  30  feet.  That  30  feet  would  be  charged  in  both  direc- 
tions for  the  98  miles  as  unauthorized  space.  We  would 
not  call  that  excess  in  that  case.  From  Amarillo  to 
Clovis — 110  miles,  I  think  you  said — — 

Question.  One  hundred  and  three  miles. 

/Vnswer.  One  hundred  and  three  miles.  Thank  you.  If 
there  were  no  facilities  for  doing  the  switching  at  Amarillo 
or  there  were  no  yards,  or  if,  on  the  other  hand,  there  was 
an  authorization  which  demanded  the  presence  of  that  car 
on  the  return  movement  of  some  kind  at  Clovis,  the  other 
103  miles  in  both  directions  would  be  charged  for  60  feet 
unauthorized.  Judging  from  the  total  amount  of  space 
in  the  particular  classihcation,  that  is  one  of  the  horrible 
examples  and  would  not  be  very  many  like  that  found. 
***** 

Question.  It  is  charged  to  the  mails  ? 

Answer.  Yes,  sir.  That  is  our  theory,  and  there  is  no 
use  in  denving  it. 

Question  (bv  Attorney  Exammer  Brown)-  What  is  the 
difference  between  the  400,000  and  the  200,000  ?  Where 
does  that  come  in  ? 

Answer.  It  has  probably  been  put  in  another  space.  Mr. 
Stewart  called  it  excess  space. 

:Mr.  Stewart.  It  is  all  there,  Mr.  Examiner,  but  in  a 
different  place. 

Question  (bv  Attorney  Examiner  Brown).  Well,  then, 
how  do  you  justify  the  charge  of  103  miles  in  both  direct- 
tions  from  Amarillo  to  Clovis  ? 

Answer.  I  just  can  not  exactly  tell  you  why  they  had  to 
run  that  train  that  way.  They  certainly  would  not  run 
a  60-foot  car  weighing  55  or  65  tons  from  Amarillo  to 
Clovis  unless  there  was  some  nnghty  good  reason  for  it. 

Question.  Apparently  they  did. 

Answer.  They  certainly  ran  it,  because  we  have  got  it 
charged  up  here,  if  the  example  stated  is  correct,  and  I 
have  no  doubt  it  is.     It  is  an  unusual  one. 

Question  (by  Mi-.  Stewart).  And  they  had  25  minutes 
at  Amarillo  to  make  the  change  ? 

Answer.  That  is  altogether  possible.  I  don't  know  the 
schedule  nor  I  don't  know  the  schedule  of  the  other  place. 
*  *  *  *  * 

Attorney  Examiner  Brown.  What  is  the  exact  position 
of  the  Post  OfTice  Department  in  reference  to  this  space 
unauthorized  to  points  beyond  which  a  60-foot  car  like  the 
very  one  you  cite  ?     Wliat  is  your  position  in  regard  to  that  ? 


278 

Mr,  Stewart.  Our  position  is  that  the  authorization 
having  conformed  to  the  needs  of  the  department  and 
having  been  made  with  reference  to  the  ability  of  the 
company  to  make  a  change  of  the  consist  of  its  trains 

%    -^  *  *  *  * 

The  department  should  be  charged  in  this  ascertainment 
of  a  fair  and  reasonable  rate  with  the  actual  operation  as 
conforming  to  the  needs  of  the  department,  and  if  the 
company  sees  fit,  for  its  0A\ai  convenience  or  for  any  other 
reason  whatsoever  for  which  the  department  is  not  re- 
sponsible, to  run  that  car  beyond,  they  should  not  charge 
the  car  to  the  mails ;  and  they  have  done  it  in  this  case  and 
they  have  done  it  in  every  other  case,  and  there  is  not  a 
single  question  where  the  space  is  in  controversy,  this  class 
of  case  or  any  other  kind  of  case,  that  they  have  not  charged 
the  entire  operation  to  the  mails. 

Mr.  Wood.  And  you  charge  them  where  ? 

Mr.  Stew\\rt.  We  participate  in  much  there. 

Mr.  Wood.  This  particular  case,  please. 

Mr.  Stewart.  Some  of  it  we  charge  to  the  passenger. 

Mr.  Wood.  This  particular  kind  of  space  which  the  ex- 
aminer was  talking  about — what  do  you  do  with  that  ? 

Attorney  Examiner  Brown.  What  I  was  driving  at,  you 
charge  the  60  feet  up  to  Canadian,  30  feet  to  Amarillo,  and 
nothing  beyond  ? 

Mr.  Stewart.  To  the  mails. 

Attorney  Examiner  Brown.  Yes. 

Mr.  Stewart.  We  charge  60  feet  up  to  Canadian,  30  feet 
from  Canadian  to  Amarillo,  because  at  Canadian  there  is 
an  opportunity  to  change  the  consist,  and  nothing,  of  course, 
to  the  mails  beyond  that,  because  no  authorization  is  made, 
and  they  have  25  minutes  in  which  to  change  the  cars. 
***** 

Mr.  Wood.  Now,  I  don't  think  the  examiner's  question 
has  been  answered,  not  to  my  understanding.  What  does 
the  Post  Office  Department  do  with  the  30  feet  from 
Canadian  to  Clovis— to  Amarillo,  and  what  does  it  do  with 
the  60  feet  from  Amarillo  to  Clovis  ? 

Attorney  Examiner  Brown.  He  says  they  charge  it  to 
the  passenger. 

Mr.  Stewart.  Charge  it  to  the  passenger  on  the  ground 
that  it  is  wholly  uneconomical  operation  for  which  the 
mail  should  not  be  responsible  in  any  degree. 

Attorney  Examiner  Brown,  In  other  words,  your  con- 
tention amounts  to  this,  that  it  is  either  negligent  operation 
or  a  scheme  to  pad  the  space.     Is  that  the  idea  ? 


279 

Mr.  Stewart.  That  is  it.     (R.  1253-1257,   1259-1262.) 

Regarding  the  operation  of  cars,  Caldwell,  Kansas,  and 
Fort  Worth,  Tex.,  Mr.  Wettling  testified  as  follows: 

Question  (by  Mr.  Stewart).  What  do  you  say  to  this 
operation  on  route  153537,  Caldwell  and  Fort  Worth 

Mr.  Wood.  What  railroad  ? 

Mr.  Stewart.  That  is  in  two  parts,  the  Chicago,  Rock 
Island  &  Pacific,  Caldwell  to  Terrell,  and  part  second, 
Chicago,  Rock  Island  &  Gulf,  Terrell  to  Fort  Worth. 

Question  (continued).  There  was  a  60-foot  full  railway 
post-office  car  authorized  from  Caldwell  to  Fort  Worth; 
from  Fort  Worth  to  Dallas  on  route  150121,  Chicago, 
Rock  Island  &  Gulf,  there  was  a  3-foot  unit  authorized. 
The  company  ran  its  car  through  from  Caldwell  to  Fort 
Worth  and  beyond  to  Dallas  over  this  route  and  claimed  the 
full  operation  for  the  deadhead  movement  in  both  direc- 
tions, amounting  to  147,000  car-foot  miles  for  the  opera- 
tion of  that  60-foot  car. 

Now,  do  you  say  that  that  operation  was  necessary  or 
was  it  a  foolish  operation,  such  as  you  have  mentioned  ? 

Answer.  Well,  sir,  I  don't  know. 

Question.  You  have  no 

Answer  (interrupting).  I  have  here  147,000  car-foot 
miles  under  "unauthorized,"  which  is  the  grand  total  for 
the  35  days  of  the  Chicago,  Rock  Island  &  Gulf.  That  is 
probably  the  movement  you  have  reference  to,  and  the 
only  charge  in  there — I  know  the  Rock  Island  people 
pretty  well.  I  know  they  are  not  running  cars  around 
when  there  is  no  necessity  for  it. 

Question  (by  Attorney  Examiner  Brown).  Where  is  the 
divisional  poirit  on  the  Rock  Island  ?  Do  you  know  whether 
it  is  at  Fort  Worth  or  Dallas  ? 

Answer.  No,  sir;  I  do  not. 

***** 

Question  (by  Mr.  Stewart).  That  is  all  the  explanation 
you  have  to  make  of  that? 

Answer.  Yes,  sir;  from  the  general  tabulations.  I 
would  not  attempt  to  make  a  further  reference  to  it.  I 
will  ask  Mr.  Searle  to  tell  me  a  little  about  that.  He  can 
probably  explain  the  matter  more  definitely  and  give 
more  details.     (R.  1270-1272.) 


280 

(B)  THE  RAILROADS  CHARGED  TO  THE  MAILS  THE 
EXCESS  SPACE  IN  70-FOOT  CARS  ON  60-FOOT 
AUTHORIZATIONS . 

Mr.  Wettling  testilSed  on  cross-examination  as  fol- 
lows: 

Question  (by  Mr.  Stewart).  Now,  I  wish,  before  leav- 
ing the  question  of  the  full  storage  car,  to  refer  to  the 
claim  that  has  been  made  for  excess  authorization  in  these 
full  cars  on  account  of  the  fact  that  the  authorization  is 
for  a  60-foot  car,  or  60-foot  or  more,  and  the  company 
runs  a  car  oversize,  say,  65  feet  or  70  feet,  and  that  excess 
space  is  not  used  by  the  mails,  but  was  reported  by  the 
companies  in  connection  with  the  mails  and  tabulated  on 
these  forms,  your  forms  and  our  forms,  indicating  an  ex- 
cess over  authorized  space  in  full  railway  post  office  and  full 
storage  cars.  Now,  that  space  you  charge  entirely  to  the 
mails  ? 

Answer.  Yes,  sir;  I  did.  I  don't  know,  of  course,  defi- 
nitely as  to  its  use,  excepting  that  I  know  that  where  a 
70-foot  car  was  furnished  to  comply  with  a  60-foot  authori- 
zation, the  10  feet  of  space  was  charged  in  excess  over 
authorization  for  the  whole  distance  of  the  authorization 
in  both  directions. 

Question.  No»v,  if  the  Post  Office  Department  was  in  no 
wise  responsible  for  that  10  feet  in  the  car,  on  what  theory 
do  you  justify  your  charge  to  the  mails? 

Answer.  I  can  only  justify  it  on  the  theory  that  the  car 
had  been  originally  built  pursuant  to  some  agreement  or 
understanding  between  the  Post  Office  Department  and 
the  railroad  company.  If  the  railroad  company  deliber- 
ately built  a  70-foot  car  and  knew  that  the  authorizations 
were  always  60  and  no  chance  for  needing  anything  beyond 
60  feet,  built  on  the  theory  of  the  past,  possibly,  that  with 
the  gradual  increase  from  year  to  year  the  time  would  come 
when  the  Post  Office  Department  would  require  more  space, 
why,  there  is  no  justification  for  it,  excepting  under  that 
condition,  of  course.  They  were  built  in  the  times  of  the 
weight  basis  of  pay,  and  the  railroad  company  probably, 
where  the  matter  occurred,  had  built  those  cars  with  a  view 
to  meeting  the  increase  as  it  gradually  came  along  from 
year  to  year,  and  possibly  to  avoid  running  an  additional 
car,  which  would  be  a  proper  economical  theory  and  plan 
for  building.  Now,  nobody  could  blame  them  for  that. 
But  strictly  under  the  space  basis,  if  it  had  been  designated 
before  these  cars  were  built,  I  doubt  very  much  if  there 
would  be  a  single  70-foot  storage  mail  car  in  existence 
to-day.     (R.  1233-1235.) 


281 

Question  (by  Mr.  Stewart).  No  restriction  about  the  use 
of  storage  car — only  with  reference  to  a  railway  post-ofTice 
car.  And  with  reference  to  the  practice  before  the  law  of 
1916,  the  law  did  provide  the  maximum  railway  post-office 
car  as  60  feet. 

Attorney  Examiner  Brown.  And  for  how  many  years 
did  that  obtain? 

Mr.  Stewart.  Oh,  it  has  obtained  since  1873.     (R.  1236.) 

Question  (by  Attorney  Examiner  Brown).  Now,  sup- 
posing that  the  Post  Office  Department  did  not  require  and 
did  not  use  that  10  feet,  but  it  was  part  of  the  consist  of 
the  train  run  from  day  to  day,  why  would  it  not  have 
been — if  you  can  give  your  reasons — equitable  and  just  to 
have  charged  that  10-foot  to  passenger? 

Answer.  Because  the  passenger  could  under  no  condition 
possible  use  it.  As  I  said  before,  if  this  space  theory  or 
scheme  had  been  conceived  before  these  70-foot  cars  were 
built  there  would  be  no  70-foot  cars  on  the  rails  to-day. 
(R.  1240,1241.) 

Question  (by  Attorney  Examiner  Brown).  Well,  the 
principle  would  be  precisely  the  same,  would  it  not,  Mr. 
Wettling,  if  the  Post  Office  Department  required  a  30-foot 
and  you  furnished  a  70-foot  car? 

Answer.  Well,  I  should  not  say  it  would  carry  quite  that 
far. 

Question.  Well,  now,  where  would  you  draw  the  line  ? 

Mr.  Wood.  You  mean  without  anv  use  for  the  other  40 
feet? 

Attorney  Exraminer  Brown.  Yes. 

Mr.  Wood.  Just  as  in  the  case  of  furnishing  a  60-foot 
car  ? 

Attorney  Examiner  Brown.  Yes,  with  the  10  feet,  the 
principle  is  the  same. 

Answer.  Well,  I  can  not  conceive  why  they  should  do 
that,  excepting  under  the  conditions  recited  in  the  30-foot 
authorization,  where  our  consist  was  so  made  up  that  our 
train  was  full  and  there  was  no  30  feet  available. 

Question  (by  Attorney  Examiner  Brown).  That  is,  you 
had  no  30  feet,  you  had  no  60  feet,  the  only  car  you  could 
use  was  a  70-foot  ? 

Answer.  Yes,  sir. 

Question.  Then  on  the  same  principle  you  would  charge 
the  mails  the  40  feet  not  used  ? 

Answer.  Not  in  quite  the  same  sense  that  it  is  charged 
here;  no,  sir.     Not  m  that  same  sense 

Question.  Well,  in  what  sense  would  you  charge  it  ? 

Answer.  Well,  it  would  be  charged  here  as  unused  space 
under  the  symbol  K  designated  by  Mr.  Stewart  a  while  ago. 


282 

Question.  You  would  just  simply  occupy  another  place 
in  the  test  ? 

Answer.  Which  was  furnishing  space  because  of  the 
lack  of  other  facilities  or  the  lack  of  space  within  the 
consist  of  the  train  to  furnish  that  space  as  required. 

Question  (by  Mr.  Wood).  The  only  real  difference  is  this, 
is  it  not,  that  in  the  one  case  you  charge  as  unused  space 
the  difference  between  the  authorized  and  the  unused 
space  in  a  car  which  did  not  conform  with  a  unit  specified 
in  the  law,  and  in  the  other  case  the  difference  is  between 
the  space  authorized  and  the  space  actually  used  which 
was  itself  larger  than  the  unit  specified. 

Answer.  Generally  that  is  the  theory,  of  course. 

Question.  You  did  the  same  with  both — charged  them 
to  the  mail  ? 

Answer.  Oh,  yes;  we  charged  them  both  to  the  mail, 
but  under  different  classifications.     (R.  1241-1243.) 

(C)  THE  RAILROAD'S  CLAIM  OF  OPERATION  OF  UNAU- 
THORIZED SPACE  IN  CONNECTION  WITH  RAILWAY 
POST-OFFICE  CAR  SERVICE  OVER  MILEAGE  NOT 
AUTHORIZED.  CHICAGO,  ROCK  ISLAND  &  GULF 
RAILWAY. 

Mr.  McBride  testified  on  direct  examination  as  follows: 

Well,  I  will  cite  the  case  of  the  Chicago,  Rock  Island  & 
Gulf  route  150121,  where  the  authorization  is  for  a  60-foot 
railway  post-oflSce  car  35  trips  from  Terrell  to  Fort  Worth. 
Operation  of  the  60-foot  car  is  claimed  between  Fort  Worth 
and  Dallas,  35  miles  farther,  for  the  round  trip,  not  being 
used  for  any  purpose  by  anybody. 

Question  (by  Mr.  Wood).  Now,  that  is  the  same  case 
that  Mr.  Searle  explained,  is  it  not  ? 

Answer.  The  same  case  that  was  under  discussion  during 
his  testimony. 

Question.  You  say  it  was  not  used  ? 

Answer.  Not  according  to  the  space  reports  submitted. 

Question.  And  his  testimony  is  that  it  was  run  over 
there  under  an  arrangement  with  your  superintendent  to 
get  the  mail  at  Dallas  and  work  it  back  to  Fort  Worth  for 
another  train  in  order  to  avoid  delay  at  Fort  Worth  ? 

Answer.  Then  I  don't  understand  why  the  railroads 
reported  it  on  Form  2  as  not  used.  This  is  taken  direct 
from  the  space  report  for  the  weight  route  150121,  and  nO' 
claim  is  made  that  any  mails  were  carried  therein.  (R. 
3830.) 


283 

(D)  UNAUTHORIZED  SPACE  CLAIMS  IN  CONNECTION" 
WITH  OPERATION  ON  DAYS  NOT  AUTHORIZED  OF 
FULL  RAILWAY  POST-OFFICE  CARS,  NEW  YORK, 
NEW    HAVEN    &    HARTFORD    RAILROAD. 

Mr.  McBride  testified  on  direct  examination  as  follows: 

Some  other  samples  of  "BB"  operation  which  might  be 
cited  in  the  full  railway  post-office  service,  train  19  of  the 
New  York,  New  Haven"^&  Hartford  Railroad,  route  126521, 
has  a  60-foot  car  authorized  30  trips  I 

Question  (by  Mr.  Stewart).  Between  what  points? 

Answer.  Between  Boston  and  New  York.  This  results 
,in  412,200  car-foot  miles.  This  car  was  operated  as  well 
on  Sundays,  and  produced  a  "B"  unauthorized  claim  of 
69,158  car-foot  miles.     (R.  3857.) 

(E)  IF  NO  MAILS  AT  ALL  WERE  CARRIED  ON  A  PARTICU- 
LAR LINE,  COMPANY  WOULD  STILL  HAVE  TO  OPER- 
ATE A  60-FOOT  BAGGAGE  CAR. 

Mr.  Bradley  testified  on  direct  examination  as  follows: 

Question  (by  Attorney  Examiner  Brown).  All  of  your 
baggage  cars  in  which  you  transport  the  baggage  and 
freight  are  not  the  same  size,  are  they  ? 

Answer.  I  believe  they  are,  as  a  rule. 

Question.  What  is  the  size  ? 

Answer.  Sixty  feet. 

Question.  I  do  not  suppose  the  Post  Office  Department 
designates,  when  they  say  "We  want  15  feet  of  space,  or 
30  feet  of  space,"  how  you  shall  carry  it,  do  they?  That 
is,  you  may  carry  it  in  a  baggage  car  or  an  oversized  apart- 
ment car  or  any  way  you  can  to  your  convenience,  can 
you  not? 

Answer.  The  authorizations  almost  invariably  mean 
that  the  space  is  to  be  provided  in  a  baggage  car.  The 
distinction  made  between  storage  space  in  a  baggage  car 
and  closed-pouch  space  in  a  baggage  car  is  supposed  to 
be  that  the  storage  space  authorized  in  a  baggage  car 
represents  the  overflow  from  a  mail  apartment  or  full 
postal  car  on  the  same  train. 

Question.  Is  that  the  reason  why  you  put  that  in  the 
baggage  car,  that  kind  of  mail  thai  is  in  a  mixed  car,  so 
that  the  baggageman  has  to  take  care  of  it? 

Answer.  That  is  true.  I  was  going  to  explain,  if  I  had 
completed  my  answer  there,  that  the  storage  space  repre- 
sents the  overload  of  a  railway  post  office  car  train  or  a 
mail  apartment  car  train,  and  only  in  cases  where  a  car 
of  excess  size,  a  mail  car  of  excess  size,  was  operated., 
would  you  find  storage  space  loaded  in  that  excess. 


284 

Question,  Well,  what  I  am  driving  at  is  this:  If  you 
had  no  mail  at  all  on  these  particular  lines,  you  would 
still  run  a  60-foot  baggage  car,  because  you  have  no 
other? 

^biswcr.  I  believe  that  is  so.     (R.  2204,  2205.) 

APARTMENT-CAR    SERVICE. 

(A)  THE  RAILROADS  CHARGED  TO  THE  MAILS  ALL  EX- 
CESS OVER  AUTHORIZATION  OF  30-FOOT  APART- 
MENTS IN  CARS,  IN  THE  SAME  MANNER  AS  IN  OTHER 
CASES. 

Mr.  Wettling  testified  on  cross-examination  as  follows: 

Question  (by  Mr.  Stewart)  .  Now  with  reference  to  the 
30-foot  apartment  cars.  They  follow  in  a  general  way  the 
same  rules  and  the  same  reasons  you  have  detailed  with 
reference  to  the  larger  size  cars,  do  they  not? 

Answer.  Generally  speaking,  yes.  Of  course  there  are 
some  differences  in  the  operation. 

Question  (by  Attorney  Examiner  Brown).  Well,  now, 
in  that  connection  it  is  not  exactly  clear  in  my  mind, 
although  I  think  I  have  it  right — if  the  Post  Office  De- 
partment orders  a  30-foot  apartment  car  and  the  carrier 
has  no  car  of  that  description  available  for  use,  and  the 
only  car  it  has  is  a  60-foot  car  with  a  compartment  in  it 
which  may  be  more  and  probably  is  more  than  30  feet, 
is  the  difference  between  the  authorization  and  what  the 
carrier  furnishes  always  charged  to  the  mails? 

Answer.  It  is  charged  for  the  distance  of  the  authorized 
naovement  as  excess  space  in  apartment  cars.  That  occurs 
through  the  fact  that  probably  in  most  of  those  instances 
the  requirements  of  the  Post  Office  Department  had,  in 
the  time  preceding  the  inauguration  of  the  space  basis, 
^een  for  60-foot  cars,  in  the  case  of  reductions  to  30-foot 
after  November  1,  1916;  and  they  had  been  in  the  habit 
of  furnishing  30-foot  cars  in  accordance  with  the  require- 
ments of  the  Post  Office  Department,  and  after  the  1st 
of  November,  1916,  the  Post  Office  Department  concluded 
they  did  not  need  quite  so  much  space  under  the  space 
theory  of  administering  the.  postal  transportation,  and 
reduced  it  to  15.  As  I  said  yesterday,  of  course  it  was 
impossible  for  the  railroad  companies  to  immediately 
reduce  their  cars  or  change  them.  In  fact,  they  did  not 
feel  that  they  ought  to  change  them  because  until  the 
test  had  been  made  and  determined  upon  neither  side  was 
certain  but  what  they  would  go  back,  possibly,  to  the 
larger  unit.     *     *     *     (R.  1272,  1273.) 


285 

(B)  THE  OPERATION  OF  THE  CARS  TO  FTTLFILL  THE 
APARTMENT  CAR  AUTHORIZATIONS  WAS  THE  SAME 
UNDER  THE  WEIGHT-BASIS  SYSTEM. 

Mr.  Wettling  testified  on  cross-examination  as  follows: 

Question  (by  Mr.  Stewart).  I  was  speaking  with  refer- 
ence to  your  opinions  on  the  operations  of  the  railroads. 
Now,  it  is  true,  is  it  not,  with  reference  to  these  30  and  15 
foot  authorizations  for  apartment  cars,  that  there  was  no 
change  made  in  the  manner  of  operating  them  during  this 
test  period  which  you  designate? 

Answer.  That  is  my  understanding.  You  mean  that 
there  was  no  change  niade  in  the  construction  of  the  cars  ? 

Question.  Yes,  and  over  the  manner  of  operating  them 
during  the  weight  period.  The  operation  was  substan- 
tially the  same  in  this  case  as  in  the  other  case  ? 

Answer.  Substantially.  I  don't  think  there  were  any 
substantial  changes  made  excepting  in  compliance  with 
the  requirements  of  the  Post  Office  Department,  w-here  it 
was  possible,  of  course,  the  car  might  have  been  shifted 
from  one  to  another,  or  from  one  route  to  another  on  the 
same  railroad.     (R.  1280,  1281.) 

(C)  RAILROAD'S  CLAIM  FOR  UNUSED  APARTMENT  CAR 
SPACE  OPERATION  OVER  MILEAGE  NOT  AUTHORIZED, 
WESTERN  PACIFIC  RAILROAD.  (POST  OFFICE  DE- 
PARTMENT EXHIBIT  83.) 

Mr.  McBride  testified  on  direct  examination  as  follows: 

This  is  one  of  the  longest  mail  routes  in  the  United 
States,  being  924  miles  in  length.  It  operates  through  an 
exceedinglv  sparselv  settled  country  from  Salt  Lake  City, 
Utah,  to  the  California  State  line,  and  then  through  a  ter- 
ritory more  thickly  settled  but  rather  well  supplied,  if  not 
fulVsupplied,  with  mail  service  by  other  lines,  it  paralleling 
the"Southern  Pacific  to  some  extent  and  never  running  a 
very  great  distance  from  it,  through  the  rest  of  its  route.  ^ 

The  authorization  during  the  statistical  period  on  this 
route  was  for  a  30-foot  apartment  seven  times  a  week 
between  Sacramento,  Calif.,  and  Winnemucca,  Nev.,  394 
miles  out  of  the  924.  This  operation  accounted  for  413,700 
car-foot  miles  for  the  statistical  period.  In  connection 
therewith  there  was  claimed  the  operation  of  the  car  con- 
taining apartment  and  therefore  the  30  feet  was  entered 
as  unused  space  in  column  23  of  Form  No.  3. 

Question  (by  Mr.  Stewart).  Between  what  points,  did 
you  state? 

Answer.  Between  Salt  Lake  and  Winnemucca,  395  miles, 
and  between  Sacramento  and  Oakland,  135  miles;  that  is, 


286 

•comprisino;  the  two  ends  of  the  train  run,  making  a  total 
of  1,113,000  car-foot  miles  of  unused  and  unauthorized 
space  as  compared  with  413,000  for  the  statistical  period. 

Question  (by  Mr.  Wood).  How  many  million? 

Answer.  One  milhon  one  hundred  and  thirteen  thousand. 

Question.  Car-foot  miles  ?  •   •         i 

Answer.  Car-foot  miles.  Now  this  car  containing  the 
apartment  carried  the  bac^gage  and  express,  and  no  other 
baggage  car  was  operated  in  this  train,  the  baggage  end 
of  the  car  operated  being  sufficient— and  I  think  thiere  was 
some  unused  space  in  the  car  besides— to  carry  the  baggage 
and  express  over  the  entire  line.  It  seems  to  us  very 
unfair  to  charge  the  mail  service  with  all  of  this  operation 
over  600  miles  of  track  for  a  service  which  we  did  not 
require,  and  which  we  have  no  use  for,  and  which  was 
required  for  the  baggage  and  express  service.  They  would 
not  have  operated  a  car  if  it  had  not  been  for  the  baggage 
and  express  service,  and  the  car  was  sufficient  without  the 
mail  apartment  to  take  care  of  those  services.  And  bear 
in  mind  that  the  inclusion  of  this  1,113,000  mail  car-foot 
miles  contributed  to  the  9.138  per  cent,  I  think  it  was,  of 
mail  participation  in  expenses.  This  did  not  go  into  the 
unoccupied  space  portion. 

Question  (by  Mr.  Stewart).  This  was  a  direct  charge, 
then,  to  the  mails? 

Answer.  Yes,  sir.     (R.  3823,  3824.) 

,(D)  THE  RAILROADS'  CLAIM  FOR  UNUSED  APARTMENT 
CAR  SPACE  OPERATION  OVER  NONMAIL  MILEAGE, 
NEW  YORK,  CHICAGO  &   ST.  LOUIS  RAILWAY. 

Mr.  McBride  testified  on  direct  examination  as  follows: 

Answer.  Along  the  same  line  I  would  like  to  call  your 

attention  to  the  claims  made  for  unauthorized  space  on 

route  131546,  the  New  York,  Chicago  &  St.  Louis  Raihyay, 

and  the  nonmail  mileage  of  the  same  company.     This  is 

the  Nickel  Plate  Road,  which  runs  from  Buffalo  to  Chicago. 

The  mail  route  extends  from  Cleveland  to  Chicago,  339 

miles.     *     *     * 

***** 

*  *  *  There  is  no  mail  service  authorized  over  the 
trackage  between  Buffalo  and  Cleveland;  no  mails  what- 
ever are  carried  on  that  road  between  those  points. 

In  four  of  the  trahis  operated  by  this  company  there  was 
authorized  during  the  statistical  period  30-foot  apartment 
car  in  fulfillment  of  which  authorization  there  was  run  a 
25-foot   apartment   car   in   a   55-foot   car,    the   remainder 


287 

being  occupied  by  baggage  and  express.  Over  the  nonmail 
mileage  between  Buffalo  and  Cleveland,  184  miles,  the  25 
feet  of  space  in  the  mail  apartment  was  claimed  as  unused 
space,  entered  in  column  23  of  Form  3,  and  under  the 
railroad  plan  charged  directly  to  the  mails,  although  no  mail 
service  was  authorized  over  the  trackage,  and  the  car  was 
evidently  operated  solely  on  account  of  the  baggage  and 
express  services. 

The  original  reports  of  this  company  included  this  space 
as  "all  other  unused  space"  in  column  25  of  Form  Xo.  3, 
and  was  transferrred  to  column  23  of  the  same  form  upon 
the  request  of  the  railway  mail  pay  committee  after  their 
examination  of  the  reports.  The  company  ap])arently  took 
the  view  originally  that  they  were  not  justified  in  claiming 
the  space  as  necessarily  operated  on  account  of  the  mails. 
We  think  the  viewpoint  of  the  company,  the  original  vie\v- 
point,  was  reasonable,  because  we  find  that  on  Sundays  it 
is  not  found  necessary  to  rmi  the  car  containing  the  mail 
apartment.  From  the  statements  of  the  company  it 
appears  that  it  was  in  possession  of  full  cars  without  mail 
apartment  which  could  have  been  operated  in  these  trains 
between  Cleveland  and  Buffalo.     *    *    * 

Question  (by  Mr.  Wood).  Let  me  see  if  I  get  that  right. 
There  was  not  any  mail  authorization  on  Sunday  ? 

Answer.  I  think  there  was  a  closed-pouch  authorization, 
perhaps,  between 

Question  (interrupting).  No  apartment-car  authoriza- 
tion? 

Answer,  No,  sir. 

Question.  And  on  those  days  they  ran  the  same  car  ? 

Answer.  Yes,  sir. 

Question.  And  they  didn't  charge  anything  to  the  mail, 
but  on  the  days  on  which  the  mail  apartment  car  was 
authorized  between  Cleveland  and  Chicago,  the  other  end 
of  the  car  contaimng  baggage  and  express,  instead  of  trans- 
ferring at  Cleveland  they  ran  the  car  tlu'ough? 

Answer.  That  is  the  way  the  reports  show. 

As  the  result  of  the  railway  mail  pay  committee's  sug- 
gestion, 58,800  car-foot  miles  were  charged  in  the  railroad 
plan  direct  to  the  mails  for  an  operation  in  which  the  mails 
had  no  interest  whatever. 

It  would  be  important  to  the  department  to  ascertain  if 
the  operation  of  this  car  is  such  as  will  come  under  the  desig- 
nation "necessary  o})eration  of  the  car,"  which  is  to  be 
paid  for  the  round  trip  under  the  railroads'  new  plan. 

Mr.  Wood.  Under  the  railroads'  new  plan,  if  the  postal 
clerks  leave  the  car  at  Cleveland  it  will  not  be  paid. 


288 

The  Witness.  Then  I  think  it  would  have  been  better 
would  it  not,  to  have  charfi;ed  that  space  elsewhere  than  to 
the  mails  during  the  statistical  period. 

Question  (by  Mr.  Stewart).  And  that  entered  into  this- 
9  per  cen,t,  as  you  have  heretofore  said  ? 

Answer.  Yes,  sir. 

Question.  Which  was  the  ratio  on  which  the  operating 
expenses  of  the  railroads  were  charged  to  the  mails  ? 

Answer.  That  is  correct.     (R.  3826-3829.) 

(E)  EXCESSIVE  SPACE  CLAIMS  IN  CONNECTION  WITH 
APARTMENT  CAR  AUTHORIZATION,  CHICAGO  & 
NORTH  WESTERN  RAILWAY. 

Mr.  McBride  testified  on  direct  examination  as  follows:. 

On  the  Chicago  &  North  Western,  route  157542,  train  5,.. 
between  Omaha  and  Long  Pine,  a  70-foot  car  was  operated 
containing  a  39-foot  railway  post-office  apartment  to  fill, 
a  15-foot  authorization  between  Omaha  and  South  Norfolk. 
The  car  was  operated  through  to  Long  Pine.  The  24  feet, 
excess  in  the  mail  apartment  was  claimed  for  three  trips 
between  Omaha  and  South  Norfolk  and  for  two  trips  over 
the  remainder  of  the  run,  resulting  in  a  charge  of  21,024 
car-foot  miles  to  the  mail  service.  Those  were  classified 
as  "BE." 

Question  (by  Mr.  Stewart).  On  what  days  was  the 
service  authorized? 

Answer.  I  couldn't  say  without  referring  to  the  original, 
report.     My  memorandum  does  not  state. 

Question.  Well,  how  many  days  a  week?  I  don't 
think  you  stated  that. 

Answer.  Why,  the  apartment  evidently  was  authorized 
daily  except  Sunday,  and  this  represents  the  operation  of 
the  excess  on  the  Sundays. 

Question  (by  Mr.  Wood).  How  do  you  think  they  would 
operate  that  without  running  it  on  Sunday  ? 

Answer.  Well,  it  seems  to  me  that  a  system  the  size  of 
the  North  Western  might  have  a  car  that  more  nearly 
fitted  the  authorization  than  a  39-foot  apartment. 

Question.  You  think  they  ought  to  have  a  car  hanging 
around  there  six  days  in  the  week  to  run  one  day  a  week 
in  place  of  that  combination  car  ? 

Answer.  A  15-foot  apartment  only  is  needed  on  every 
day. 

Question.  You  think  they  ought  to  have  another  car 
there  ?  I  am  talking  about  the  Sunday  operation.  You 
think  they  ought  to  have  another  car  there,  and  keep  it 
six  days  a  week  to  run  the  seventh  ? 


289 

Answer.  No;  I  don't. 

Question.  I  didn't  think  you  would. 

Answer.  I  don't  think  the  apartment  car  is  authorized 
on  Sundays  at  all.     I  am  not  certain  as  to  that. 

Question  (by  Mr.  Stewart).  But  you  don't  think  that 
surplus  movement  ought  to  be  charged  to  the  mails  ? 

Answer.  No;  not  in  the  manner  in  which  it  has  been 
charged  by  the  railroads.     (K.  3859-3861.) 

SIXTY-FOOT  STORAGE  CAR  SERVICE. 

(A)  THE  RAILROADS  CHARGED  TO  THE  MAILS  ALL  UN- 
AUTHORIZED AND  UNUSED  SPACE  REPORTED  IN 
CONNECTION  WITH  THE   60-FOOT    STORAGE   CARS. 

]Mr.  Wettlixg  testified  on  cross-examination  as  follows: 

Question  (by  Mr.  Stewart).  Considering  now  the  60-foot 
storage  car,  it  is  true,  is  it  not,  that  all  the  unauthorized  space 
and  the  operations  in  connection  therewith  and  the  excess 
space  and  operation  which  is  covered  by  your  definitions  of 
classifications  and  our  definitions  of  classifications  reported 
in  connection  with  these  60-foot  car  authorizations  was 
charged  entirely  to  the  mails  ? 

Answer.  Yes,  sir;  in  connection  with  full  storage  cars. 
Any  excess  space,  excess  length  of  the  car,  deadhead  move- 
ment, was  all  charged  up  to  the  full  storage  cars  as  excess 
over  authorizations;  then  there  is  another  designation  of 
unauthorized  included  in  the  charges  also. 

Question.  Now  we  will  reach  that,  probably,  in  the 
analysis,  if  you  will  allow  me  to  continue. 

Referring  to  our  Exhibit  No.  47  and  the  definitions 
under  symbol  A,  we  have  there  a  full  mail-storage  car, 
authorized  between  points  A  and  B,  but  the  full  car  was 
run  by  the  railroad  company  beyond  the  authorized 
distance,  between  B  and  (J.  This  is  what  we  all  call  m 
this  respect  excess  unauthorized. 

Answer..  That  we  would  call  unauthorized;  yes,  sir — 
not  excess. 

Question.  Well,  the  excess  of  operation  is  unauthorized. 
You  call  it  unauthorized  ? 

Answer.  Yes,  sir. 

Question.  Now  that  unauthorized  operation  you  charge 
to  the  mails  ? 

Answer.  I  do. 

Question.  Now,  what  was  your  theory  upon  which  you 
made  that  charge  ? 

122G98— 19 19 


290 

Answer.  Why,  it  does  not  differ  from  the  theory  that 
was  applied  throughout.  We  tried  to  follow  the  same 
principle  in  all  these — the  same  basic  principles. 

Question.  Then  it  must  be,  of  course,  following  the 
same  suggestions  you  have  made,  that  it  was  necessary 
for  the  company  to  operate  that  car  between  B  and  C 
because  it  was  authorized  between  A  and  B.  That  I 
assume  to  be  the  general  statement  of  the  reason. 

Answer.  In  so  far  as  there  is  any  space  of  that  kind  in 
connection  with  the  full  cars,  that  is  a  minor  matter,  be- 
cause there  might  only  be  space  of  that  kind — unauthor- 
ized, now,  I  am  talking  about,  and  not  excess — in  which 
there  was  a  controversy  between  the  Post  Office  Depart- 
ment and  the  railroad  as  to  what  was  in  fact  a  division 
point  at  which  cars  were  regularly  switched  in  and  out  of 
the  train,  as  the  make-up  of  the  train  changed.  (R.  1225, 
1226.) 

Question  (by  Mr.  Stewart)  .  Now,  Mr.  Wettling,  let  me 
comeback  to  your  reasons.  As  I  understand  you,  it  is 
that  it  was  necessary  for  the  companies  to  operate  this  car 
in  that  manner,  therefore  you  charge  this  operation  to 
the  mails;  but  is  it  not  true  that  in  all  these  cases  the 
authorization  is  made  limited  to  a  divisional  point  ? 

Answer.  That  is  the  understanding,  and  I  think  it  is  the 
attempt  of  the  Post  Office  Department  to  do  that;  but,  as 
Mr.  Corridon  said  on  the  stand  the  other  day,  there  is 
sometimes  a  controversy  between  the  Post  Office  Depart- 
ment and  the  railroads  as  to  what  is  in  fact  a  divisional 
point  for  the  purpose. 

Question.  But  just  for  the  convenience  of  your  answer, 
assuming  that  there  might  be  a  question  in  regard  to  that, 
and  that  might  throw  some  of  this  excess  in  the  doubtful 
column,  is  it  not  true  that  regardless  of  that  you  charge 
every  operation  to  the  mails  ? 

Answer.  Every  operation  that  we  consider  necessary  in 
connection  with  the  full  storage  cars  is  charged  to  the  mail 
directly. 

Question.  And  don't  you  consider  every  excess  author- 
ization as  necessary,  regardless  of  the  fact  as  to  whether 
or  not  it  was  a  divisional  point,  as  admitted  by  the  com- 
pany, or  one  as  under  controversy  ? 

Answer.  I  couldn't  tell  as  to  that,  Mr.  Stewart,  and  I 
charge  up  exactly  what  the  railroad  companies  reported 
to  me,  and  my  assumption  is  that  it  was  omy  in  such  cases 
that  it  was  reported  to  me.  That  is  as  far  as  I  can  tell  you 
about  it.     (R.  1227,  1228.) 

Question  (by  Attorney  Examiner  Brown).  Well,  it 
seems  to  me,  without  having  any  great  amount  of  knowl- 


291 

edge  about  it,  that  if  you  had  a  full  storage  car  and  it  ran 
from  A  to  B,  that  economical  operation,  when  that  A  to  B 
was  the  run,  and  the  train  went  on  to  C,  is  to  drop  that 
car  out  ? 

Answer.  Yes,  sir. 

Question,  You  would  do  that  ordinarily,  wouldn't  you? 

Answer.  Ordinarily  they  would  do  that,  and  they  would 
not  fail  to  do  it  if  it  was  a  point  at  which  the  make-up  of 
the  train  was  changed  and  it  was  reasonably  possible  to 
do  it.  it  does  not  seem  reasonable  that  a  railroad  operat- 
ing man  would  carry  a  60-foot  car  without  any  load  what- 
ever for  miles  and  miles  without  some  use  for  it. 

Question  (by  Mr.  Stewart)  .  But  it  seems  so  clear  from 
these  reports  by  the  railroad  companies  and  the  tabula- 
tions of  them  that  it  was  actually  done. 

Answer.  There  were  some  of  them  moved,  there  is  no 
question  about  it.     We  show  it  here. 

Question.  Notwithstanding  aU  you  have  said  with  regard 
to  the  reasonableness  of  not  doing  it,  you  have  charged 
that  excess  space  operation  to  the  mails? 

Answer.  Where\^er  it  has  been  run  we  have  certainly 
charged  it.     (R.  1228,  1229.) 

Question  (by  Mr.  Stewart).  Now  let  us  take  the  same 
kind  of  a  case,  a  case  involving  the  same  kind  of  a  car 
authorization  as  described  on  Post  Office  Department 
Exhibit  47  under  ''B."  There  you  have  fuU  mail  storage 
car  authorized  six  or  less  times  a  week,  but  the  fuU  car 
was  run  by  the  railroad  company  on  other  days  in  the 
week.  This  is  excess  unauthorized,  and  I  think  you  call 
it  on  your  table  unauthorized,  class  it  in  the  same  category. 
Now  you  charged  aU  that  to  the  mails,  did  you  not  ? 

Answer.  I  have  charged  522,000  car-foot  miles  of  that 
kind  of  space  to  fuU  storage  cars  as  reported  to  me,  and  I 
am  not  perfectly  clear  as  to  the  conditions  under  which 
that  car  was  moved,  if  there  was  no  authorization  either  out 
or  inbound,  without  use  for  it. 

Question.  WeU,  the  point  is  you  charge  it  aU  to  the 
mails,  and  you  charged  the  total  reported  without  making 
any  exception. 

Answer.  After  having  made  comparisons  with  the  Post 
Office  Department's  approved  form,  that  is  approved  only 
as  to  the  accuracy  of  reporting  in  conformity  with  the 
requirements,  we  made  no  further  corrections. 

Question.  Take  this  class  of  excess  defined  here  under 
symbol  B,  and  we  find,  for  instance,  that  the  authorization 
was  for — well,  take  the  most  favorable  case  to  the  rail- 
road company — six  times  a  week.  Now,  the  companies 
appear  to  have  operated  that  car  in  the  train  every  day 


292 

of  the  week,  and  it  is  this  excess  operation  which  is  in- 
cluded in  this  total,  and  which  you  have  charged  to  the 
mails.  What  is  your  theory  upon  which  that  charge  was 
made? 

Answer.  I  have  no  theory  as  to  this  522,000  car-foot 
miles  in  the  case  of  the  full  storage  car,  charging  this 
space  on  days  not  authorized.  I  can  not  conceive  of  the 
movement  of  a  60-foot  car  without  any  load  whatever  in 
behalf  of  the  mail  on  a  day  that  it  is  not  authorized,  unless 
there  was  some  real  reason  why  that  car  should  be  at  the 
other  end  to  meet  an  authorization.  If  that  is  not  the 
case,  why,  I  can  not  justify  that  522,000  feet.  Somebody 
else  will  have  to  explain  it.     I  can  not. 

Question.  I  think  you  are  very  fair  in  your  answer 
there.     I  don't  think  you  can  explain  it. 

Answer.  I  try  to  be  fair  in  all  my  answers,  Mr.  Stewart. 
(R.  1229-1231.) 

Mr.  Wettling  testified  further  that  the  raikoads 
operated  the  60-foot  storage  cars  in  the  same  manner 
under  the  weight  basis: 

Question  (by  Mr.  Stewart).  Now,  Mr.  Wettling,  still  re- 
ferring to  these  60-foot  storage  cars,  is  it  not  true  that  the 
operation  of  these  cars  as  we  have  been  discussing  it  ob- 
tained in  exactly  the  same  manner  under  the  weight  sys- 
tem as  under  the  space  system  ? 

Answer.  I  think  so,  yes,  sir.  I  do  not  know  definitely, 
but  I  think  that  that  is  the  case.  That  is  the  general 
impression  that  I  have. 

Question.  It  is  general  information.  I  think  any  one 
would  say  that  that  is  so. 

Answer.  Yes,  sir. 


Question  (by  Attorney  Examiner  Brown).  Well,  if  that 
be  true  on  this  seventh  day,  if  you  did  not  have  any 
weight,  you  did  not  get  paid  for  it. 

jGiswer.  Well,  we  got  paid  so  much  for  the  mail,  regard- 
less of  whether  the  load  was  heavy,  whether  it  was  con- 
densed, or  whether  the  use  of  the  equipment  was  restricted 
to  the  absolute  needs,  or  whether  it  was  extravagantly 
demanded,  did  not  make  any  difference — much— although 
the  comparisons  that  have  been  made  seem  to  indicate  that 
even  under  this  space  basis  our  average  load  is  less  than  it 
was  back  in  1913. 

Question  (by  Mr.  Stewart).  That  is,  a  great  deal  of  this 
equipment,  Mr.  Examiner,  which  was  more  extravagantly 
operated,  I  might  say,  under  the  weight  basis,  has  been 


2»3 

released  under  the  space  basis  and  turned  back  to  the  com- 
panies. That  accounts  for  the  great  decrease  in  car-miles — 
*     *     *^ 

The  point,  IVIi*.  Wettling,  of  my  questions  along  tha  b  line 
was  this,  that  the  railroad  companies,  under  the  weight- 
basis  system,  made  no  objection  whatever  to  the  o[)eration 
of  these  cars  in  this  manner. 

Answer.  Well,  I  don't  know  whether  they  maac  objec- 
tions or  not,  Ml-.  Stewart,  but  I  know  that  the  operations 
were  pretty  much  the  same. 

Question.  And  that  if  they  did  so  operate  them  in  this 
manner  it  was  wholly  voluntary  on  their  part  ? 

Answer.  I  would  hardly  go  that  far  as  to  agree  with 
you  in  that  respect.     (R.  1231-1233). 

Regarding  operation  in  trains  25  and  5,  Kansas  City 
and  Denison,  Mr.  Wettling  testified  as  follows : 

Question  (by Mr. Stewart).  *  *  *  Intrains25and5, 
KansasCity  to  Denison,  Tex.,  and  trains  8  and  28,  Denison 
to  Kansas  Cit;^,  there  was  a  60-foot  storage  car  authorized 
daily,  except  Monday,  over  the  whole  distance  of  410  miles. 
The  unauthorized  Monday  operation  was  reported  and 
claimed  by  the  railroad  company  in  each  direction,  pro- 
ducing 246,000  car-foot  miles,  ^e  car  was  an  oversize 
car,  being  9  feet  longer  than  the  authorized  size.  This 
produced  additional  car-foot  miles  claimed  by  the  company 
of  39,900  car-foot  miles,  making  a  grand  total  for  that 
particular  claim  of  282,900  car-foot  miles.  In  addition 
to  this  claim,  the  company  claimed  excess  space  oversize 
on  authorized  trips  in  which  the  car  was  run  under  authori- 
zation, producing  a  total  of  219,760  car-foot  miles,  making 
a  grand  total  of  502,660  car-foot  miles  claimed  by  the  com- 
pany, and  that  claim  was  charged  entirely  against  the  mail 
imder  your  theory.  What  justification  have  you  to  ojffer 
for  that  ? 

Answer.  I  hope,  Mr.  Stewart,  you  don't  think  that  I 
have  photographed  on  my  mind  all  these  details  in  these 
fifty  and  odd  thousand  sheets  of  returns  ?  *  *  *  Now, 
in  the  first  place,  will  you  kindly  mention  the  name  of  the 
railroad  that  you  have  in  mind  ? 

Question.  The  Missouri,  Kansas  &  Texas,  route  153519. 

I  realize,  Mi-.  Wettling,  that  you  could  not  retain  such 
details  in  your  mind,  and  if  it  is  more  convenient  to  you, 
I  will  change  the  form  of  my  question  by  asking  you  if  this 
be  true  that  you  have  charged  it  to  the  mails,  then  what 
justification  have  you  for  doing  so  ? 


294 

Answer.  Well,  let  us  see,  first,  if  it  is  true.  The  Missouri, 
Kansas  &  Texas — and  do  I  understand  you  to  refer  to  a 
full  railway  post-ofTice  car  or  a  full-storage  car  ? 

Question.  A  full-storage  car. 

Answer.  In  the  case  of  the  Missouri,  Kansas  &  Texas  we 
have  charged  here  for  excess  space  in  full-storage  cars  for 
the  35  days  219,760  car-foot  miles. 

Question.  That  is  excess  space  ? 

Answer.  Excess  over  authorized  in  full-storage  cars. 
There  is  none  in  full  railway  post  office.  I  don't  identify 
the  five  hundred  and  odd  thousand  that  you  speak  of, 
offhand. 

Question.  The  other  movement  is  what  would  be  deter- 
mined the  unauthorized  for  the  oversize  operation  on 
Monday,  when  no  mails  were  authorized  to  be  carried. 

Answer.  That  would  be  in  part  on  the  Missouri,  Kansas 
&  Texas  and  in  part  on  the  Missouri,  Kansas  &  Texas  of 
Texas  I  presume,  would  it  not?  There  would  be  a  split 
between  them? 

Attorney  Examiner  Brown.  Yes;  between  Denison  and 
the  State  line. 

Answer.  Well,  without  the  R.  M.  P.  forms  I  shall  be 
unable  to  identif  j^  that  particular  movement  exactly,  be- 
cause we  necessarily  join  all  the  unauthorized  space  here. 
I  have,  as  it  is,  about  53  different  subdivisions  of  all  these 
various  spaces;  but  to  extend  it  to  the  point  where  I  could 
teU  what  happened  on  every  train,  it  would  be  some  53,000 
instead  of  53. 

In  the  case  of  the  Missouri,  Kansas  &  Texas  I  have 
charged  here  what  seems  to  me  the  class  of  space  you  refer 
to  for  the  movement  in  one  direction  345,870  car-foot  miles 
for  35  days,  and  for  the  Missouri,  Kansas  &  Texas  of  Texas 
32,505  of  the  same  nature.  On  the  return  movement  cor- 
responding with  that,  but  not  identified  with  the  particular 
train  or  route  that  you  speak  of,  692,901  car-foot  miles. 
Those  two  or  three  items  may  contain  the  item  that  you 
speak  of.  The  probabilities  are  that  in  that  case  it  was 
necessary  to  move  that  car  in  order  to  have  the  car  at  the 
other  end  to  fulfiU  the  authorization  of  Monday  morning 
or  Monday  afternoon,  as  the  case  may  be. 

Question.  Why  could  not  that  have  been  met  by  holding 
the  car  at  the  end  of  the  run  or  the  terminal  ? 

Answer.  WeU,  you  had  the  authorization  in  one  direc- 
tion, didn't  you,  and  the  car  had  to  go  back  somehow  or 
other? 

Question.  The  authorization  is  in  both  directions? 

Mr.  Wood.  Just  what  was  the  authorization  in  each 
direction  ? 


295 

Mr.  Stewart.  Full  60-foot  car. 

Mr.  Wood.  I  know,  but  what  days  in  the  week  in  each 
direction  ? 

Mr.  Stewart.  All  excepting  Monday. 

Mr.  Wood.  And  Monday  was  eliminated  in  each  direc- 
tion 'i     Is  that  right  ? 

Mr.  Stewart.  Yes,  sir. 

Question  (by  Mr.  Stewart)  .  Is  that  all  the  explanation 
you  have  to  offer  in  that  case  ? 

Answer.  Yes,  sir. 

Question.  And  if  it  should  be  true  that  the  requirements 
of  operation  could  have  been  met  on  these  other  days  by 
holding  the  car  at  terminals,  there  would  then  be  no  justi- 
fication for  your  charging  to  the  mails  this  amount? 

Answer.  Well,  if  the  operation  of  the  railroad  company 
was  a  perfectly  foolish  operation,  running  empty  cars 
around  without  any  excuse,  I  could  see  no  excuse  for  charg- 
ing it;  but  the  railroads  are  not  in  the  habit  of  running 
their  cars  in  that  manner. 

Question.  Well,  we  had  a  case  yesterday  where  you  were 
not  able  to  find  any  reason  why  they  ran  cars  in  that 
manner. 

Answer.  I  don't  know  the  reason  for  the  individual  op- 
eration on  each  train  of  the  thousands  of  trains  that  run 
daily  throughout  the  United  States.  I  would  not  hope  to 
be  able  to  tell  it  to  you. 

Question.  On  your  direct  examination  you  were  very 
positive  that  these  operations  were  necessary  ? 

Answer.  Yes,  sir;  as  reported  to  us  under  the  general 
scheme  or  request  for  reports  as  submitted  to  the  railroads 
and  agreed  upon,  and  I  assume  that  the  railroads  followed 
the  instructions.  That  I  felt  I  had  a  right  to  assume.  (R. 
1265-1270.) 

(B)  nNATJTHORIZED  SPACE  CLAIMS  FOR  ONE  ROUND 
TRIP  IN  CONNECTION  WITH  STORAGE  CAR  AUTHORI- 
ZATION FOR  SIX  ROUND  TRIPS,  MISSOURI,  KANSAS 
&  TEXAS  RAILWAY. 

Mr.  McBride  testified  on  direct  examination  as  follows: 

Under  this  classification  also  comes  the  full  storage  car, 
referred  to  in  some  of  the  previous  testimony,  between 
Kansas  City  and  Denison,  where  it  was  authorized  30 
trips  in  each  direction  and  operated  unused  in  each  direc- 
tion 5  trips. 

Question  (by  Attorney  Examiner  Brown).  It  did  not 
run  on  Sunday  ? 

Answer.  It  ran,  but  was  not  authorized. 


296 

That  is  the  Missouri,  Kansas  &  Texas  case.     (R.  3857.) 

And: 

Ileferrin<?  to  the  case  of  the  storage  car  of  the  Missouri 
Kansas  &  Texas  Railway,  which  was  authorized  week  days 
and  not  authorized  on  Sundays,  but  the  operation  of  which 
was  claimed  on  Sundays,  the  rci)ort  shows  that  a  69-foot 
car  was  operated  in  fulfillment  of  that  authorization. 

Question.  What  was  the  authorization? 

Answer.  60-foot. 

By  the  way,  that  unauthorized  operation  was  on  Mon- 
day instead  of  on  Sunday. 

Question  (by  Mr.  Wood).  What  was  that? 

Answer.  The  unauthorized  operation  was  Monday  in- 
stead of  Sunday. 

Question.  Tliey  would  have  to  get  the  car  back,  would 
they  not  ? 

Answer.  But  it  was  not  authorized  in  either  direction, 
so  that  by  holding  over  a  car  at  each  end  they  could  take 
care  of  the  service.     That  is,  it  looks  to  me  that  way. 

So  that  in  addition  to  the  60-foot  car  claimed  there  is 
also  a  claim  for  9  feet  excess  for  the  five  trips  in  each  direc- 
tion, which  resulted  in  36,000  more  car-foot  miles  to  be 
charged  to  the  mails  direct  and  included  in  the  basis  for 
participation.     (R.  3859.) 

STORAGE  SPACE  SERVICE. 

<A)  THE  RAILROADS  CHARGED  TO  THE  MAILS  ALL  UN- 
AUTHORIZED AND  UNUSED  SPACE  REPORTED  IN 
CONNECTION  WITH  30-FOOT  STORAGE  UNITS,  BUT 
DID  NOT  FOLLOW  SAME  RULE  AS  TO  EXPRESS. 

Mr.  Wettling  testified  on  cross-examination  as  follows: 

Question  (by  Mr.  Stewart).  As  a  matter  of  fact,  Mr. 
Wettling,  in  regard  to  these  30-foot  units,  you  have  charged 
all  the  unauthorized  and  all  the  excess  space,  under  what- 
ever designation  or  definition  they  may  be  indicated  on 
your  exhibits  and  our  exhibits,  to  the  mail,  regardless  of 
any  reason  whatever  excepting  these  general  reasons  you 
have  given — they  are  all  charged  to  tlie  mails. 

Answer.  The  reasons  are  not  so  general. 

Question.  And  they  were  all  charged  to  the  mails,  with- 
out exception  ? 

Answer.  Just  exactly  the  same  as  we  charge  aU  the 
express  and  the  passenger  and  the  baggage  car  to  each  of 
those  services. 

Question.  Just  as  you  do  not  charge  them  to  express  ? 


297 

Answer.  Oh,  certainly,  we  charge  them  to  express  in  all 
full  cars. 

Question.  I  am  not  speakinc^  now  of  full  cars.  I  have 
not  reached  that.     We  are  talkmg  about  30  feet  and  under. 

Answer.  All  right;  30  feet  and  under.  *  *  *  (R. 
1223,  1224.) 

(B)  DUPLICATION  OF  CLAIMS  OF  UNUSED  AND  UNAU- 
THORIZED SPACE  IN  CONNECTION  WITH  STORAGE- 
SPACE  AUTHORIZATIONS  BECAUSE  OF  MAILS  BEING 
CARRIED   IN  OVERSIZE   APARTMENT   CARS. 

Mr.  McBride  testified  on  direct  examination  as  follows: 

The  Witness.  The  records  of  the  department  show  that 
the  storage  mail  authorized  on  six  of  the  above-described 
routes  (Nos.  161501,  161512,  161516,  161517,  161518,  and 
161531  of  the  Great  Northern  Railway)  is  carried  in  over- 
sized railway  post-office  apartments.  The  authorized  mail 
operation,  as  well  as  the  excessive  unauthorized  space 
claims  in  connection  therewith,  should  therefore  have  been 
deducted  from  the  excess  unauthorized  apartment  space 
in  column  12.  of  Form  No.  4,  instead  of  being  charged 
against  space  in  baggage  compartment.  In  consequence 
of  this  irregular  method  of  reporting  the  service,  there 
results  a  duplication  of  these  already  excessive  claims  to 
the  amount  of  90,009  car-foot  miles  for  the  six  routes 
named. 

Similar  cases  of  the  same  character  are  noted  m  the 
reports  for  routes  Nos.  143530  and  143534  of  the  Chicago, 
Rock  Island  &  Pacific  Railway,  where,  in  connection  vnth. 
an  authorized  service  car-foot  mileage  of  900,  there  has 
been  a  duplication  of  an  excessive  claim  aggregating 
21,780  car-foot  miles. 

On  route  No.  143558  for  the  same  company,  in  connec- 
tion with  a  storage-mail  authorization  totaling  6,090  car- 
foot  miles,  excessive  claims  for  authorized  space  move- 
ments amounting  to  159,040  have  been  made  against  the 
baggage  end  of  the  car  instead  of  being  charged  agamst 
the  excess  space  in  the  apartment,  where,  according  to  the 
company's  report  on  Form  No.  6,  the  authorized  mail 
services  are  actually  performed.  The  indicated  ratio  of 
26.1  to  1  is  therefore  actually  raised  to  52.2  to  1  in  conse- 
quence of  the  duplication  described. 

Northern  Pacific  Railroad  mail  routes  Nos.  171502, 
171508,  171516,  and  171518  show  simihir  duplicated 
charges  amounting  to  29,890,  58,310,  11,520,  and  13,545 
car-foot  miles,  respectively. 


298 

Groat  Northern  roiito  No.  171508  has  a  claim  on  trains 
Nos.  381  and  382  amounting  to  23,560  car-foot  miles, 
which,  together  with  authorized  service  of  8,360,  shows  a 
total  of  31.920  car-foot  miles,  the  amount  by  which  column 
12  of  Form  No.  4  should  be  reduced;  on  route  No.  163510, 
a  7-foot  unit  of  space  is  authorized  on  train  No.  242  for  121 
miles.  Although  the  company's  aflidayit  covering  service 
performed  during  the  period  shows  this  mail  was  carried 
in  the  oversized  apartment,  the  authorized  mail  total  of 
57,575  car-foot  miles,  and  a  corresponding  amount  for  the 
unauthorized  return  movement  of  the  space  in  train  No. 
241,  have  been  charged  against  space  in  the  baggage  end 
of  the  car,  leaving  column  12  in  excess  by  115,150  car-foot 
miles.     (R.  494,  495.) 

(C)  UNAUTHORIZED  SPACE  CLAIMS  IN  CONNECTION 
WITH  STORAGE-SPACE  AUTHORIZATIONS,  KANSAS 
CITY  TO  TUCUMCARI,  CHICAGO,  ROCK  ISLAND  & 
PACIFIC  RAILROAD. 

Mr.  McBride  testified  on  direct  examination  as  follows: 

The  next  case  to  which  I  desire  to  invite  your  attention 
is  that  of  the  unauthorized  claims  made  in  connection 
with  the  operation  of  a  30-foot  storage  space  for  10  trips 
during  the  period  in  train  1,  Kansas  City  and  Tucum- 
cari  railway  post  office,  on  the  Rock  Island.  This  author- 
ization is  in  addition  to  a  60-foot  storage  car  authorized  five 
times  a  week,  which  is  paid  for  in  the  return  direction, 
although  not  used. 

In  connection  with  this  30-foot  authorization  of  storage 
space  for  10  trips,  producing  185,400  car-foot  miles  over 
a  run  of  618  miles,  the  company  claimed  the  operation  of 
the  same  amount  of  space  for  25  trips  over  the  same 
mileage,  resulting  in  463,500  car-foot  miles.  In  addition 
they  also  made  claim  for  the  return  movement  on  train  2 
over  the  entire  distance  daily,  648,900  car-foot  miles,  or  a 
total  of  1,112,400  car-foot  miles,  all  of  which  was  included, 
not  only  in  the  basis  from  which  the  9  per  cent  was  deduced 
for  participation  in  operating  expenses,  but  was  also  in 
this  case  included  in  the  basis  upon  which  the  unoccupied 
space  x>n  the  system  was  apportioned. 

On  the  25  unauthorized  trips  it  is  shown  by  reference  to 
the  report  that  the  necessity  for  the  operation  of  this  car 
on  those  days  arose  from  the  fact  that  17  feet  of  express 
and  12  feet  of  baggage  was  regularly  carried  between 
Kansas  City  and  Texhoma  on  train  1,  a  distance  of  474 
miles.  In  'fact,  in  this  case  the  two-times-a-week  storage 
authorization  really  serves  to  reduce  what  would  otherwise 


299 

have  been  a  necessary  haulage  of  empty  or  dead  space  in 
connection  with  the  regular  performance  of  baggage  and 
express  service.  In  other  words,  it  seems  to  me  that  in 
this  case  it  would  hare  been  more  proper  and  much  fairer 
in  every  way  to  have  charged  this  excess  operation  on  those 
25  davs  to  tlie  express  and  baggage  rather  than  to  the  mails, 
and  tlius  increase  the  percentage  of  mail  participation. 

Question.  It  was  necessary  to  operate  tnat  to  carry  the 
express  and  baggage  ? 

Answer.  Evidently  so  from  the  reports.  I  might  say 
that  the  unauthorized  operation  was  classified  under  "B," 
or  "BB, "  as  we  subclassify  it.     (R.  3855-3857.) 

And  subsequently: 

Question  (by  Mr.  Wood).  Mr.  McBride,  before  you  get 
into  that,  if  it  won't  interrupt  you,  I  would  like  to  ask  you 
about  this  Rock  Island  case,  Kansas  City-Tucumcari. 

Answer.  Yes,  sir. 

Question.  Now,  that  is  a  case  where  there  was  a  60-foot 
storage  authorization  five  days  a  week  and  a  30-foot  storage 
authorization  two  days  a  week.     Is  that  it? 

Answer.  That  is  the  way  I  understand  it. 

Question.  And  on  the  two  days  on  which  there  was  a  30- 
foot  storage  authorization  they  charged  the  other  30  feet  ? 
Is  that  it,  or  how  was  that  ? 

Answer.  For  6  days  of  the  10  there  was  13  feet  devoted 
to  baggage,  18  feet  to  express,  30  feet  to  this  storage  unit, 
and  five  feet  unoccupied. 

For  4  of  the  10  days,  10  feet  was  occupied  by  baggage, 
16  feet  by  express,  30  feet  by  the  authorized  unit,  and  4 
feet  unoccupied. 

For  8  of  the  days,  13  feet  occupied  by  baggage,  18  feet 
by  express,  30  feet  claimed  as  unused  space  in  connection 
with  the  mails  in  column  23  of  Form  3,  and  5  feet 
unoccupied. 

For  13  days  the  figures  were,  10  feet  for  baggage,  16  feet 
for  express,  30  feet  unused  space  charged  to  the  mails,  and 
4  feet  unoccupied. 

And  for  4  days  of  the  period,  12  feet  charged  to  baggage, 
18  feet  to  express,  and  30  feet  unused  space,  ^v^th  5  feet 
unoccupied. 

That  takes  care  of  the  35-day  period. 

Question.  That  means  that  "for  the  25  days  on  which 
there  was  no  authorization  they  charged  30  feet  to  the 
mails  ? 

Answer.  Yes,  sir. 

Question.  That  is  it,  is  it  not  ? 

Answer.  As  unused  space. 


300 

Question.  That  is  the  cause  of  your  complaint? 

Answer.  Yes,  sir. 

Question.  Now,  it  also  appears  that  at  no  time  did  the 
baggage  and  express  occupy  more  than  the  remaining  space 
in  that  car  after  setting  aside  30  feet  for  the  mails. 

Answer.  That  is  not  what  we  object  to. 

Question.  No;  but  that  does  appear. 

Answer.  It  appears  that  there  was  also  unoccupied 
space  in  addition  to  aU  those  three  claims. 

Question.  And  your  objection  is  that  except  for  the  mail 
on  they  would  have  had  that  waste  space  in  there  any  way 
they  would  have  had  30  feet  of  waste  space  7  days  a  week 
instead  of  5,  except  for  the  30  feet  of  mail  authorized — that 
is  the  ground  of  your  criticism,  is  it  not? 

Answer.  Except  for  the  30  feet  which  the  railroads 
claim  as  being  necessary  to  mail  service. 

Question.  What  do  you  know  about  the  consist  of  that 
train  ? 

Answer.  Why,  I  don't  know  anything  except  what  these 
reports  show. 

Question.  What  do  you  know  about  the  rearrangement 
of  the  consist  of  that  train  that  could  be  made  for  the  entire 
seven  days  if  it  was  not  for  this  30-foot  storage  authoriza- 
tion on  two  days  ? 

Answer.  I  couldn't  say  as  to  that. 

Question.  Now,  if  it  be  a  fact  that  but  for  that  30-foot 
storage  authorization  on  two  days  the  Rock  Island  could 
cut  that  baggage  car  out  entirely  and  substitute  for  it  a 
smoker,  combination  smoker,  and  baggage  car  with  space 
in  baggage  end  sufficient  to  take  care  of  all  the  baggage  and 
express  that  your  own  reports  show  accompanies  that 
train,  then  that  entire  car  as  an  extra  car  in  the  train  is  due 
to  this  30-foot  storage  authorization  two  days  a  week,  is 
it  not  ? 

Answer.  It  does  not  appear  that  the  railroad  operates 
any  such  car  in  this  train.  There  is  no  passenger  service 
claim  made. 

Question.  You  don't  know  anything  about  the  consist  of 
that  train  or  the  rearrangement  of  it  that  could  be  made 
except  for  this  30-foot  storage  authorization  two  days  a 
week  ? 

Answer.  I  don't  know  anything  at  all  about  the  corsist, 
except  as  shown  by  these  reports,  which  show  full  passenger 
car,  full  mail  car,  full  storage  car,  and  this  mixed  car. 

Question.  And  you  don't  know  what  rearrangement  of 
the  consist  of  that  train  could  be  made  except  for  that  two 
times  a  week  30-foot  storage  authorization  ? 


301 

Answer.  I  don't  know  that  any  rearrangement  would  be 
possible.     It  may  be.     I  would  not  say  it  would  not  be. 

Mr.  Wood.  I  would  like  to  ask  Mr.  Searle  whether  it  is 
not  a  fact  that  except  for  the  30-foot  storage  authorization 
two  days  a  week  the  Rock  Island  would  cut  that  car  out 
of  the  train  and  substitute  for  the  smoker  and  baggage  car 
that  they  now  run  a  combination  smoker  and  baggage  car, 
thus  eliminating  one  car  entirely. 

Mr.  Searle.  Yes,  sir.     That  is  what  would  be  done. 

Question  (by  Mr.  Wood).  And  in  all  those  other  cases 
you  have  described,  you  don't  know  the  extent  to  which  the 
regular  consist  of  the  train  is  dependent  on  those  lesser 
units  of  authorization  any  more  than  you  did  in  this  Rock 
Island  case  ? 

Answer.  I  can  state  that  I  don't  know  what  the  situation 
is  as  to  consist  of  trains. 

Mr.  Stewart.  I  would  like  to  ask  Mr.  Searle  if  they 
would  do  it. 

Mr.  Searle.  We  undoubtedly  would  do  it  if  we  had  the 
opportunity. 

Mr.  Stewart.  That  is  not  an  answer.  Why  can't  it  be 
done  on  the  days  when  the  storage  is  not  authorized  ? 

Mr.  Searle.  It  is  not  practicable  to  do  it. 

Mr.  Stewart.  You  are  not  prepared  to  say  that  they 
will  do  it  ? 

Mr.  Searle.  I  couldn't  say  unless  we  had  the  oppor- 
tunity. 

Mr.  Stewart.  Suppose  you  had  the  opportunity  ? 

Mr.  Searle.  I  have  no  doubt  we  would  take  advantage 
of  the  opportunity  to  reduce  the  consist. 

The  Witness.  It  would  seem  to  me  that  if  that  is  so  you 
would  do  it  for  the  five  days  a  week,  even  if  you  do  not  do 
it  the  other  two.     (R.  3861-3865.) 

(D)  CLAIMS  OF  UNATJTHORIZED  SPACE  IN  CONNECTION 
WITH  STORAGE  SPACE  ATTTHORIZED,  SOUTHERN 
RAILWAY  AND  UNION  PACIFIC  RAILWAY. 

Mr.  McBride  testified  on  direct  examination  as  follows: 

In  storage  space,  a  case  in  point  is  on  route  114527, 
Southern  Railway,  between  Washington  and  Greensboro, 
there  was  authorized  15  feet  of  storage  space  30  trips, 
producing  128,000  car-foot  miles.  There  was  claimed  in 
connection  therewith  the  unauthorized  movement  of  the 
15  feet  five  trips,  producing  21,450  car-foot  miles. 

Question  (by  Mr.  Stewart).  That  was  the  Sunday 
operation  ? 

Answer.  Yes,  sir.     (R.  3857,  3858.) 


302 

Similarly  on  the  Union  Pacific,  route  165519,  train  103, 
a  7-foot  storage  authorization,  Sundays  only,  Denver  to 
Cheyenne,  in  connection  with  which  there  was  an  unau- 
thorized claim  for  the  7  feet  for  the  remaining  30  trips  of 
the  period  between  the  same  points,  resulting  in  22,260 
car-foot  miles. 

Question.  That  is  a  case  where  the  authorization  was 
only  on  Sunday,  but  they  charged  on  week  days  as  well  for 
the  whole  period  ? 

Answer.  That  is  correct.     (R.  3858.) 

NO  CHARGES  OF  EXCESS  SPACE  IN  MIXED  CARS  WERE 
MADE  AGAINST  EXPRESS  AS  WERE  MADE  AGAINST 
MAILS,  ALTHOUGH  NO  OPERATING  REASONS  JUSTI- 
FIED THAT  ACTION. 

(A)  NO  CHARGES  OF  EXCESS  SPACE  IN  MIXED  CARS 
WERE  MADE  AGAINST  EXPRESS  AS  WERE  MADE 
AGAINST  THE  MAILS. 

Mr.  Wettling  testified  on  cross-examination  as  follows : 

Mr.  Stewart.  Now  referring,  Mr.  Wettling,  just  again 
to  your  exhibit  No.  6.  I  think  you  have  testified  that  with 
respect  to  the  express  service  no  charges  were  made  against 
that  service  similar  to  those  which  we  have  been  discussing 
in  regard  to  the  mails.     I  think  you  have  answered  that. 

Answer.  The  matter  of  return  movement  and  excess 
space — there  is  not  any  such  thing  in  connection  with  the 
express  movement  in  our  interpretation  of  these  exhibits. 

Question.  That  is  to  say,  you  did  not  report  any  such 
movements  ? 

Answer.  No,  sir.  Some  few  roads  did,  but  not  mixed 
cars. 

Question.  You  exj^ress  the  view  that 

Answer  (interrupting).  I  beg  your  pardon.  I  want  to 
qualify  that,  Mr.  Stewart.  On  the  movement  of  empty 
express  full  cars  that  is  charged  against  them.     (R.  1288.) 

And  in  reply  to  Dr.  Lorenz's  questions: 

Question  (by  Dr.  Lorenz).  I  would  like  to  ask  one  thing 
further  in  regard  to  that  return  empty  movement  con- 
nected with  express  service. 

I  understood  you  to  say  that  express  was  not  charged 
with  any  empty  space  ? 

Answer.  With  very  little  exception,  Doctor.  The  excep- 
tion was,  not  charged  with  any  empty  return  space  in  the 
mixed  cars. 

Question.  In  the  mixed  cars  ? 


303 

Answer,  As  to  the  full  cars,  it  was  charged  with  its  full 
amount  of  actual  returned  empty  cars. 

Question.  I  am  speaking  of  mixed  cars. 

Answer.  Yes,  sir. 

Question.  Now,  if  that  could  be  ascertained  and  you 
knew  what  it  was,  you  would  have  charged  it  there,  would 
you  not  ? 

Answer.  Well,  we  did  not  attempt  to,  really. 

Question.  No ;  but  if  you  knew  ? 

Answer.  Yes. 

Question.  Five  per  cent  or  10  per  cent,  you  would  have 
put  it  there  ? 

Answer.  Yes,  sir;  I  think  we  would,  if  the  traffic  was 
unbalanced.  One  of  the  principal  reasons  for  not  making 
that  inquiry  was  that  we  felt,  from  general  experience  and 
general  talk  about  it,  that  the  express  matter  was  more 
nearly  balanced  than  the  mail,  and  that  there  was,  as  a 
matter  of  fact,  the  chance,  in  many  instances,  for  a  balance 
in  the  other  way;  that  is,  it  ran  contrary  to  the  mail,  to 
some  slight  extent — only  very  slight,  though. 

Question.  That  being  true  in  regard  to  the  express 
space,  why  would  you  be  willing  to  handle  all  the  space  in 
mixed  cars,  say,  in  this  manner:  Set  down  from  your  Form 
No.  3  the  space  used  by  the  baggage,  the  space  used  by  the 
express,  the  space  authorized  that  you  have  not  used  for 
the  mails,  take  all  the  rest  and  put  it  in  one  lump  and 
divide  it  in  the  proportions  of  the  first  three  that  I  have 
mentioned.  Would  you  be  willing  to  have  that  done  as 
a  modification  of  the  figures  ? 

Answer.  Well,  it  seems  to  me  that  we  have  practically 
done  that,  Doctor.  That  is,  that  is  what  we  have  attempted 
to  do,  except  that  we  did  not  include  that  one  element,  in 
so  far  as  it  is  left  out,  that  is  to  say,  to  charge  the  return 
movement  on  the  express  or  empty  movement  that  might 
actually  have  been  there. 

Question.  Well,  if  the  effect  of  the  method  I  have  sug- 
gested would  slightly  reduce  the  charge  to  the  mail  and 
slightly  increase  it  to  the  express  and  baggage,  but  remove 
any  controversy  on  that  point,  would  you  not  be  willing  to 
have  that  done  ? 

Answer.  If  you  want  to  do  anything  at  all  that  looks  fair 
in  that  manner,  we  would  be  very  glad  if  we  could  be 
shown  a  way  out  of  that  difficulty  that  our  attention  has 
been  called  to,  and  I  am  able  to  do  it  from  the  data  that 
I  have  on  hand.  It  is  problematical.  But  I  think  I  may 
be  able  to  find  it. 

Question.  Well,  if  you  took  this  method  I  mentioned  or 
made  the  other  correction  that  you  mention  there  would  be 


304 

practically  no  controversy  between  you  and  the  Post  Office 
Department  with  regard  to  mixed  cars  ? 

Answer.  No;  I  assume  not,  because  the  Post  Office 
Department,  while  it  does  not  admit  as  much  space  as  we 
claim,  in  ])rinciple  they  admit  that  theory  as  to  the  mixed 
cars,  as  I  interpret  their  testimony.  I  am  not  stating  that 
as  absolute,  but  that  is  my  interpretation  of  the  testimony. 

Question.  Suppose  that  the  commission  in  studying  tms 
space  question  should  decide  that  there  was  some  space, 
whether  it  was  one  foot  or  a  thousand  or  a  million  feet — 
suppose  there  was  some  space  that  they  felt  had  been 
unjustly  charged  to  the  mail  in  the  sense  that  it  was  useless 
operation,  or  from  any  other  reason 

Answer.  Yes. 

Question.  What  then  should  be  done  with  that?  The 
Post  Office  Department  has  charged  such  space  to  the 
passenger.  Would  it  not  be  more  logical  simply  to  ignore 
it  or  disregard  it  as  not  having  been  in  the  total  length  of 
the  train  at  all  ? 

Answer.  Wliy,  that  was  the  only  thing  that  could  be 
done  to  it.  It  would  not  be  fair  to  charge  it  to  any  one 
service,  because  the  same  argument  that  charges  it  to  the 
passenger  might  charge  it  in  a  lump  sum  to  the  express, 
which  would,  of  course,  be  manifestly  unfair.  (R.  1348- 
1352.) 

(B)  THE  POINT  OF  DISTINCTION  CLAIMED  BY  THE  RAIL- 
ROADS BETWEEN  THEIR  OBLIGATIONS  TO  CARRY 
THE  MAILS  AND  THE  EXPRESS  AND  ASSIGNED  AS 
THE  REASON  FOR  THE  DIFFERENCE  IN  THE  MAN- 
NER OF  CHARGING  SPACE  TO  THE  MAILS  HAS  NOT 
IMPOSED  ON  THE  RAILROADS  ANY  DIFFERENCE 
IN  TRAIN  OPERATION. 

Mr.  Wettling  testified  on  cross-examination  as  follows: 

Question  (by  Mr.  Stewart).  Now,  having  specifically 
located  your  point  of  difference  between  these  two  services, 
I  will  ask  you  if  you  ever  knew  of  a  case  where  it  was 
necessary  for  the  railroad  company  to  operate  more  in  its 
train  consist  than  it  would  otherwise  have  operated  in 
order  to  get  this  car  back  to  the  initial  point  of  run  to 
take  care  of  this  3-foot  or  7-foot  authorization  of  space  ? 

Answer.  No;  I  suppose  not.  I  would  not  claim  any 
such  ridiculous  thing  as  that. 

Question.  Then  as  a  matter  of  fact  this  obUgation  that 
you  have  designated  as  the  sole  distinction  between  the 
mail  and  the  express  service,  and  the  reason  why  you 
have  charged  this  to  the  mails,  has  not  inaposed  upon  the 
railroad  companies  any  change  whatever  in  the  operation 
of  their  trains  to  carry  it  out?     (R.  1212,  1213.) 


305 

(C)  IT  WAS  JUST  AS  NECESSARY  FOB  THE  RAILROADS 
TO  OPERATE  THEIR  CARS  TO  CARE  FOR  THE  EX- 
PRESS AS  FOR  THE  MAILS,  YET  THEY  DID  NOT 
CHARGE  SPACE  TO  EXPRESS  IN  A  MANNER  TO  PLACE 
EXPRESS  ON  A  PARITY  WITH  THE  MAILS. 

Mr.  Wettling  testified  on  cross-examination  as  follows: 

Question  (by  Mr.  Stewart)  .  Was  it  just  as  necessary  for 
the  railroad  companies  to  operate  their  train  service  to  care 
for  the  express  service  as  it  was  to  care  for  the  mail  service 
in  those  cars?  I  am  speaking  now  of  the  closed-pouch 
service. 

Answer.  Yes;  so  far  as  the}^  w^anted  the  trafHc. 
***** 

Question.  Now,  coming  back  to  your  answer  with  refer- 
ence to  the  express  service,  I  believe  you  said  that  prac- 
tically the  same  rule  would  apply  to  the  space  to  be  devoted 
to  the  express  as  to  the  mails.  If  so,  then  did  you  charge 
to  the  express  service  all  such  space  in  the  same  manner 
as  you  have  charged  the  space  to  the  mails? 

Answer.  No;  we  do  not  specifically  charge  the  express 
with  the  difference  between  the  peak  load  and  the  load 
that  went  on  at  any  one  particular  point;  and  our  reason 
for  that  was  on  the  general  principle  that  there  was  no 
specific  space  necessarily  demanded  or  laid  aside  or  kept 
or  required  to  be  kept  for  the  transportation  of  that 
traffic.     In  that,  it  differed  from  the  mail. 

Question.  But  that  did  not  mark  any  difference  from 
the  mails  so  far  as  these  specific  statistics  were  concerned  ? 
These  statistics  were  taken  to  evidence  the  actual  condition, 
on  the  train,  as  I  understand  ? 

Answer.  Except  as  I  quaUfied  the  matter  on  the  3  and 
7  foot  units,  they  were. 

Question.  So  that  if  there  were  such  a  thing  as  a  peak 
load  of  express  you  should  have  treated  that  just  the  same 
as  you  treated  a  peak  load  of  mail,  if  you  are  going  to  put 
them  on  a  par  ? 

Answer.  Well,  I  just  explained  that  I  didn't  do  so,  and 

I  thought  that  there  was  no  occasion  to  do  so. 

*  *=  *  *  *  * 

Question.  You  did  not  charge  to  the  express  any  return 

movement 

Answer.  No,  sir. 

Question  (continuing).  As  you  did  to  the  mail? 

Answer.  No,  sir. 

122698—19 20 


306 

Question.  Don't  you  think  it  would  have  been  proper 
to  have  done  that  to  place  them  on  a  parity,  if  you  propose 
to  charge  that  space  to  the  maOs? 

Answer.  No.  I  thought  not  for  the  same  reasons  that 
I  gave  with  regard  to  the  outward  movement. 

Question,  And  those  reasons,  as  I  understand  you  to 
say,  are  based  in  what  you  term  the  postal  regulations, 
and  that  is 

Answer  (interrupting).  The  fact  that  the  duty  is  im- 
posed upon  the  carrier  to  reserve  certain  space  over  part 
of  the  run  for  the  Post  Office  Department. 

Question.  But  in  the  case  of  a  return  movement,  Mr. 
Wettling,  there  is  no  requirement  of  that  kind? 

Answer.  No ;  but  then  you  have  got  to  get  the  car  back 
to  the  starting  point  to  take  your  next  train  out,  haven't 
you? 

Question.  Yes;  but  you  had  to  get  it  back  to  take  the 
express  out. 

Answer.  Sure;  but  we  carried  express  matter  both  ways, 
very  largely. 

Question.  So  did  you  carry  mails  both  ways? 

Answer.  We  did.  The  traffic  is,  however,  in  our  opinion, 
somewhat  better  balanced.  I  am  sorry  that  we  have  not 
got  the  exact  figures,  but  we  failed  on  certain  parts  of  our 
statistics,  or  we  would  have  been  able  to  show  that,  (R. 
1204,  1205,  1207,  1208,  1209,  1210.) 

(D)  BULK  OF  EXPRESS  BUSINESS  ORIGINATES  AT  THE 
SAME  POINT  AS  THE  BULK  OF  THE  MAIL  AS  A  GEN- 
ERAL THING,  AND  CHANGES  IN  EXPRESS  TRAFFIC 
WOULD  IN  A  MEASURE  PARALLEL  THE  MUTATIONS 
IN  THE  MAIL  TRAFFIC, 

Mr.  Fairfield  testified  on  cross-examination  as  follows : 

Question  (by  Mr.  Stewart)  .  Speaking  of  the  maximum 
load  at  the  initial  point  of  the  run  with  respect  to  the 
emergency  service,  you  said  that  in  one  case  at  least  when 
the  load  diminished  en  route  you  practically  lost  the  value 
of  that  space,  and  you  based  your  opinion  as  to  that  on 
your  view  that  if  it  were  available  to  you  at  the  initial 
point  you  would  load  express  in  it  ? 

Answer,  Yes, 

Question,  But  not  having  been  available  you  did  not 
load  it  with  express  but  carried  out  the  mail  in  that  par- 
ticular space  ? 

Answer,  Yes,  sir. 

Question,  Now,  is  it  not  true  that  you  may  have  business 
offered  you  along  the  line  at  different  points  which  would 
enable  you  to  use  some  of  this  space  ? 


307 

Answer.  Wei],  the  bulk  of  the  express  is  received  at  the 
same  point  the  bulk  of  the  mail  is  received.  There  is  very 
little  express  picked  up  along  the  line  for  other  local 
points,  there  being  sufficient  space  available  for  that  kink 
of  local  business  in  the  space  released  by  the  local  express 
unloaded  at  each  such  point.  There  is,  of  course,  a  con- 
stant interchange  on  all  our  local  trains  at  every  station, 
but  the  bulk  of  the  business  originates  at  the  same  point 
as  the  bulk  of  the  mail,  as  a  general  thing. 

Question.  You  think  the  express  would,  in  a  measure, 
parallel  the  mutations  of  the  mails? 

Answer.  Yes,  sir. 

Question.  Then,  of  course,  your  objection  would  apply 
only  to  those  cases  where  at  the  initial  point  you  have  the 
peak  load  ? 

Answer.  Yes,  sir. 

Question.  And  would  not  apply  to  cases  where  you 
might  have  loads  which  were  an  increase  over  that  at  an 
intermediate  point? 

Answer.  No.     (R.  2327,  2328.) 

APARTMENT,  STORAGE,  AND  CLOSED-POTJCH  SERVICE, 

(A)  CLAIMS  OF  UNAUTHORIZED  AND  UNUSED  SPACE 
IN  CONNECTION  WITH  APARTMENT  CAR,  STORAGE, 
AND  CLOSED-POUCH  AUTHORIZATIONS  BY  GREAT 
NORTHERN  RAILWAY.  (POST  OFFICE  DEPARTMENT 
EXHIBIT    84.) 

Mr.  McBride  testified  on  direct  examination  as  follows 
with  reference  to  trains  241  ajid  242  operating  between 
Great  Falls  and  BiUings,  Mont.,  on  the  Great  Northern 
Railway,  submitting  Exhibit  No.  84  in  connection  therewith: 

*  *  *  This  is  mail  route  163510,  235  miles.  The 
authorization  in  train  241  is  for  a  15-foot  apartment  au- 
thorized 30  trips  between  Great  Falls  and  Judith  Gap,  121 
miles.  A  30-foot  apartment  car  is  operated  in  fulfillment 
of  that  authorization. 

Question  (by  Attorney  Examiner  Brown)  .  Do  you  know 
whether  Judith  Gap  is  a  division  point  ? 

Answer.  I  do  not.  I  assume  so  under  the  department's 
rules,  or  it  would  not  be  charged  there. 

Between  Judith  Gap  and  Billings  there  is  a  3-foot  closed 
pouch  authorized  30  trips.     That  is  114  miles. 

In  train  242,  the  return  trip,  Great  Falls  to  Judith  Gap, 
there  is  a  15-foot  apartment  car  authorized  30  trips,  7  feet 
of  storage  authorized  30  trips  and  3-foot  closed  pouch 
authorized  on  Sundays  and  3-foot  closed  pouch  authorized 


308 

30  trips  between  Judith  Gap  and  Billings.  No  authoriza- 
tion on  Sundays  between  those  points. 

In  connection  with  these  trains  the  following  claims  were 
made  on  the  space  forms  submitted  by  this  company: 

On  train  242  they  have  claimed,  and  rightly,  the  15-foot 
apartment  authorization  30  trips  between  Great  Falls  and 
Judith  Gap,  the  7-foot  storage  authorization  121  miles, 
30  trips,  between  the  same  points,  and  the  3-foot  closed 
pouch  authorized  five  trips  between  the  same  points,  and 
a  3-foot  closed  pouch  authorized  on  30  trips  between 
Judith  Gap  and  Billings. 

In  connection  with  this  they  have  claimed  the  operation 
of  the  15-foot  apartment  unauthorized  30  trips  between 
Judith  Gap  and  Billings,  the  15-foot  apartment  car  un- 
authorized 5  trips  between  Great  Falls  and  Billings,  the 
entire  run. 

They  have  claimed  15  feet  excess  in  oversize  apartment 
for  the  35  trips  over  the  whole  line. 

In  connection  with  the  7-foot  storage  authorization 
between  Great  Falls  and  Judith  Gap  they  have  claimed 
7  feet  unauthorized  for  the  remainder  of  the  run  for  the  same 
number  of  trips,  and  for  the  entire  mileage  on  the  5  trips, 
Sundays,  notwithstanding  the  fact  that  the  affidavits  of 
the  company  show  that  the  storage  unit  was  regularly 
carried  in  the  oversize  apartment  car. 

In  connection  with  the  3-foot  closed  pouch  authorized 
week  days  between  Judith  Gap  and  Billings,  they  have 
claimed  an  unauthorized  operation  between  Great  Falls 
and  Judith  Gap. 

For  the  five  days  in  which  the  closed  pouch  was  author- 
ized between  Great  Falls  and  Judith  Gap  they  have 
claimed  the  same  amount  of  space  unauthorized  between 
Judith  Gap  and  Billings. 

In  train  241,  the  return  train,  they  have  claimed  the 
operation  of  the  authorized  apartment  for  30  trips  between 
G&eat  Falls  and  Judith  Gap  and  the  3-foot  closed  pouch 
authorized  30  trips  between  Judith  Gap  and  Billings,  a 
total  authorized  mileage  of  64,710. 

In  connection  with  that  they  have  claimed  the  15-foot 
apartment  operated  unauthorized  between  Judith  Gap  and 
Billings,  the  15  feet  excess  space  in  the  oversize  apartment 
for  35  trips,  and  the  15-foot  apartment  operated  over  the 
entire  line  for  the  5  trips,  Sundays. 

They  have  also  claimed  7  feet  of  storage  space  un- 
authorized for  the  entire  mileage,  being  presumably  the 
return  of  the  7-foot  storage  authorized  Great  Falls  to 
Judith  Gap  in  train  242. 


309 

In  connection  with  the  3-foot  closed  pouch  authorized 
between  Judith  Gap  and  BilUngs  they  have  claimed  the 
same  amoimt  of  space  unauthorized  between  Great  Falls 
and  Judith  Gap  for  30  trips,  and  the  3  feet  over  the  entire 
line  for  the  5  trips,  making  an  unauthorized  claim  on  this 
train  of  262,000  car-foot  miles  as  against  an  autho'ized 
claim  of  64,000,  while  in  train  242  the  authorized  service 
equaled  91,935  car-foot  miles,  while  the  unauthorized 
equaled  237,000. 

Question  (by  Mr.  Wood).  Mr.  McBride,  how  much  of 
that  unauthorized  space  grows  out  of  charging  up  in  the 
baggage  car  of  space  in  addition  to  the  charging  up  of  the 
excess  space  in  the  oversize  apartment  ? 

Answer.  In  train  242  it  would  amount  to  23,940  car-foot 
miles  plus  8,225  car-foot  miles,  and  in  train  241  it  would 
amount  to  57,575  car-foot  miles. 

Question.  That  is  on  account  of  the  concurrent  opera- 
tion there,  *  *  *  your  point  there  is  that  they  charged 
it  in  twice  ? 

Answer.  Charged  double,  because  it  was  carried  in  the 
oversize  apartment  car. 

Question.  Well,  you  made  a  special  classification  of  that 
kind  in  connection  with  the  examination  of  these  reports 
in  which  you  grouped  together  all  cases  of  that  kind  in  the 
United  States,  did  you  not  ? 

Answer.  We  made  a  classification  of  that  character; 
yes,  sir. 

Question.  And  what  is  the  total  amount  of  double  charge 
of  that  sort  ? 

Answer.  I  am  not  certain  that  all  of  these  cases  got  into 
that  classification,  however. 

Question.  Well,  the  classification  is  there,  although  you 
have  not  shown  the  result.     But  I  am  asking  j^ou  what  is 
the  total  amount  represented  by  cases  of  that  kind  ( 
***** 

Answer.  457,580. 

Question.  This  represents  about  10  per  cent  of  it? 

Answer.  Yes. 

Question.  And  the  whole  thing  represents  about  1  per 
cent  of  the  entire  amount  of  unauthorized  space  appor- 
tioned by  the  railroads  to  the  mail '( 

Mr.  Stewart.  A  very  small  per  cent  but  a  very  largo 
principle.  n    /   i  • 

Answer.  I  want  to  enlarge  upon  that  fact  that  all  of  this 
space  under  the  railroads'  plan,  not  only  this  duplicated 


310 

operation  but  all  of  the  remainder  of  this  unauthorized 
space,  the  round-trip  claim  in  connection  with  closed 
pouch,  the  round-trip  claim  in  connection  with  storage,  the 
round-trip  claim  in  connection  with  excess  space,  all  goes 
in  to  form  part  of  the  9  per  cent. 

Question  (by  Mr.  Stewart)  .  And  can  you  discover  from 
these  charts,  and  what  you  have  before  you  as  the  basis  of 
them,  whether  there  is  any  possible  claim,  aside  from  the 
double  charge  made,  that  the  company  could  have  made 
that  they  did  not  make  ? 

Answer.  /  have  beeii  unable  to  find  anything  in  connection 
with  this  route  and  most  routes  that  they  have  not  claimed  in 
connection  with  the  mails.^     (R.  3831-3836). 

(B)  CLAIMS  OF  UNAUTHORIZED  AND  UNUSED  SPACE  IN 
CONNECTION  WITH  APARTMENT  CAR,  STORAGE  AND 
CLOSED-POUCH  AUTHORIZATIONS  BY  GREAT  NORTH- 
ERN RAILWAY.  (POST  OFFICE  DEPARTMENT  EX- 
HIBIT 85.) 

Mr.  McBride  testified  on  direct  examination  as  follows: 

Answer.  *     *     *     Along  this  same  line  I  would  like  to 
invite  your  attention  to   the  situation  and   the  data  as 
reported  by  the  Great  Northern  Railway  on  route  161525. 
***** 

Train  209  and  train  210.  These  trains  operate  from 
Devils  Lake,  N.  Dak.,  to  Boundary  Line,  6  times  a  week, 
78  miles.  There  is  authorized  a  15-foot  apartment  car 
between  Churches  Ferry  and  St.  Johns,  55  miles.  There  is 
a  3-foot  storage  authorization  Mondays  only  between  the 
same  points.  Between  St.  Johns  and  Boundary  Line,  4 
miles,  there  is  a  3-foot  closed-pouch  authorization  30  days. 

In  connection  with  these  trains  the  company  has  claimed 
the  authorized  operation  as  stated  by  me,  and  in  addition 
has  made  the  following  claims  for  unauthorized    space: 

The  15-foot  apartment  unauthorized  between  Devils 
Lake  and  Churches  Ferry  and  between  St.  Johns  and 
Boundary  Line.  There  having  been  a  25-foot  apartment 
furnished  in  fulfillment  of  that  authorization,  they  have 
also  claimed  the  10  feet  excess  space  in  the  oversize  apart- 
ment over  the  entire  mileage.     *     *     * 

Question  (by  Mr.  Stewart).  What  was  the  result  of 
that  m  miles  ? 

Answer.  It  resulted  m  an  authorized  car-foot  mileage 
of  24,750  and  an  unauthorized  car-foot  mileage  of  33,750. 

In  connection  with  the  3-foot  storage  authorization 
Mondays  only,  they  have  claimed  operation  of  that  amount 
of  space,  3  feet,  in  the  baggage  car  over  the  remaining 

*  Italics  are  the  Department's. 


311 

mileage  for  the  5  trips,  and  over  the  entire  mileage  for  the 
25  trips,  although  the  company's  affidavit  covering  the 
mail  service  performed  on  this  train  sho\vs  that  the  3-foot 
storage  was  carried  ever}-  Monda}'  in  the  oversize  railway 
post-office  apartment  car. 

Question.  Now  what  was  the  result  of  that? 

Answer.  The  result  of  that  produced  825  car-foot  miles 
of  authorized  space  and  6,195  car-foot  miles  of  unauthorized 
space. 

Question  (by  Mr.  Wood).  That  also  is  in  column  X, 
and  is  this  double  charge  of  which  you  spoke  before  ? 

Answer.  The  6,195  would  be  in  X. 

In  connection  with  the  3-foot  authorization  of  closed- 
pouch  space  operated  4  miles  between  St.  Johns  and 
Boundary  Line  they  have  claimed  the  same  amount  of 
space  over  the  remainder  of  the  Ime,  74  miles,  which 
results  m  360  car-foot  miles  of  authorized  space  and 
6,660  car-foot  miles  of  unauthorized  space. 

The  total  for  the  train  is  25,935  for  authorized  and 
46,605  car-foot  miles  for  the  unauthorized  space. 

Question  (by  Mr.  Stewart)  .  Do  you  see  any  place  there 
that  they  could  have  claimed  more  than  they  did  by  any 
possible  combination  ? 

Answer.  Ao,  /  do  not.  It  seems  to  me  that  they  have 
claimed  everything  that  could  possibly  he  claimed  * 

Question.  And  this,  of  course,  affects  the  9  per  cent  just 
as  those  to  which  you  have  referred  ? 

Answer.  Yes  sn.     (R.  3836-3839). 

(C)  UNAUTHORIZED  SPACE  CLAIMS  IN  CONNECTION  WITH 
APARTMENT  CAR,  STORAGE,  AND  CLOSED-POUCH  AU- 
THORIZATIONS, CHICAGO.  ROCK  ISLAND  &  PACIFIC 
RAILWAY. 

Mr.  McBride  testified  on  direct  examination  as  foUows: 

The  Chicago,  Roclv  Island  &  Pacific  route  157547.  I 
would  like  to  invite  your  attention  to  train  39,  which 
operates  on  this  route  between  BelleviUe,  Kans.,  and 
Colorado  Springs,  Colo.,  a  distance  of  420  miles. 

A  30-foot  apartment  is  authorized  from  Belleville  to 
Goodland,  234  miles.  The  car  containmg  this  item  is 
reported  as  having  heen  operated  through  to  Colorado 
Springs  unauthorized,  resultnig  in  a  claim  for  unauthorized 
car-foot  mileage  of  195,300. 

Question  (by  Mr.  Stewart)  .  Over  what  distance  ? 

Answer.   186  miles. 

In  addition  to  the  apartment  authorization  a  7-foot  unit 
of   storage    space    is    authorized    between    Belleville    and 


Italics  are  the  Department's. 


312 

Goodland.  At  the  latter  point,  which  is  the  end  of  the 
authorized  apartment  car  mn,  the  authorization  changes 
from  7-foot  storage  to  7-foot  closed-pouch  unit  from 
Goodland  to  Limon,  Colo.,  107  miles.  At  Limon,  the 
authorization  is  changed  to  a  3  foot  closed-pouch,  which  is 
operated  through  to  the  end  of  the  train  run,  79  miles. 
The  company  claimed  the  unauthorized  operation  of  both 
the  7-foot  unit  of  storage  space  and  the  7-foot  unit  of 
closed-pouch  space  over  the  entire  train  run  of  420  miles, 
notwithstandmg  the  fact  that  these  authorizations  did  not 
mn  concurrently  over  any  portion  of  the  run.  This  treat- 
ment resulted  'in  a  duplication  of  unauthorized  space 
claims  amounting  to  102,900  car-foot  miles. 

In  the  return  direction,  train  40  has  a  3-foot  closed-pouch 
authorization  for  186  miles  from  Colorado  Springs  to 
Goodland,  19,530  car-foot  miles.  The  company  has 
claimed  in  this  tram  in  addition  to  this  authorized  mileage 
not  only  the  unauthorized  movement  of  the  apartment 
car  hi  return,  but  a  return  for  both  the  7-foot  closed-pouch 
unit  and  the  7-foot  storage  unit  over  the  entire  420  miles  of 
the  train  run,  producing  an  unauthorized  car-foot  mileage 
of  186,270. 

Question.  That  is  to  say,  if  I  understand  you  correctly, 
m  addition  to  the  extra  charge  on  the  apartment  car  tram, 
and  while  the  7-foot  storage  and  the  7-foot  closed-pouch 
outbound  were  not  concurrent  on  any  mileage,  they  were 
charged  as  concurrent  on  the  outbound  trip  through,  and 
then  charged  on  the  return  trip  in  the  same  manner  ? 

Answer.  That  is  true. 

Question.  That  goes  a  Uttle  beyond  what  you  might 
expect  they  might  do  on  the  face  of  the  record  ? 

Question  (by  Mr.  Wood.)  What  does  that  go  into,  X? 

Answer.  *  *  *  On  the  outward  movement  it  would 
be  classified  as  A,  and  in  the  return  movement  it  would 
be  classified  as  R. 

Question.  I  am  speaking  about  this  double  charge,  i  ou 
claim  there  has  been  a  double  charge  there. 

Answer.  Yes,  sir;  but  it  is  not  double  in  the  sense  that 
the  other  doable  movement  was.  That  is,  it  was  not  mail 
that  was  carried  in  the  excess  apartment.  It  was  a  double 
charge  of  closed-pouch  space  or  storage  space,  but  the 
apartment  was  not  involved,  as  the  mails  were  not  carried 
in  the  apartment  cars,  as  I  undei-stand. 

Question.  The  apartment  car  had  nothing  to  do  with  the 
other,  then? 

Answer.  No,  except  that  it  simply  adds  to  the  unauthor- 
zed  car-foot  miles.     (R.  3839-384L) 


313 

(D)  UNAUTHORIZED  SPACE  CLAIMS  IN  CONNECTION  WITH 
AUTHORIZED  MAIL  SPACE  MADE  BY  NORFOLK  & 
WESTERN  RAILWAY. 

Mr.  McBride  testified  on  direct  examination  as  follows: 

*  *  *  In  this  connection  I  would  like  to  specify  in 
detail  some  of  the  claims  made  on  route  114528,  Norfolk 
&  Western  Railway. 

Train  3  had  a  7-foot  storage  authorization — understand 
that  all  of  these  matters  touch  upon  the  service  as  reported 
during  the  statistical  period  and  do  not  necessarily  mean 
movement  at  the  present  time. 

Question  (by  Attorney  Examiner  Browx).  Well,  the  fig- 
ures of  the  railroads  are  based  on  them  ? 

Answer.  Yes,  sir. 

This  is  a  7-foot  authorization  from  Lynchburg  to  Roa- 
noke, a  distance  of  53  miles,  daily  except  Sunday.  The  train 
itself  operates  from  Norfolk  to 'Columbus,  672  miles.  This 
operation  for  53  miles  produces  11,130  car-foot  miles.  In 
connection  therewith  the  company  made  claim  for  the 
following  unauthorized  movement: 

Seven  feet  for  30  trips  from  Norfolk  to  Lynchburg  on  week 
days,  204  miles,  42,840  car-foot  miles,  classified  as  "A." 

Seven  feet,  5  trips,  257  miles,  from  Norfolk  to  Roanoke, 
on  Sundays,  8,995  car-foot  miles,  classified  as  "B." 

Seven  feet  for  35  trips  for  415  miles  from  Roanoke  to 
Columbus,  equaling  101,675  car-foot  miles,  classified  as 
"A." 

A  total  of  153,510  car-foot  miles. 

In  addition  to  this  operation  there  was  a  claim  of  return 
space  in  train  4  in  connection  with  this  53  miles  authoriza- 
tion amounting  to  53,970  car-foot  miles,  classified  as  "R." 

Train  17,  operating  between  Lynchburg  and  Bluefield, 
has  a  3-foot  closed-pouch  authorization  daily  except  Sun- 
day from  Cambria  to  Walton,  a  distance  of  7  miles,  pro- 
ducing 630  car-foot  miles. 

The  unauthorized  space  claims  made  are  as  follows: 

Three  feet  for  30  trips,  86  miles,  livnchburg  to  Cambria, 
on  week  days,  7,740  car-foot  miles,  classified  as  ''A." 

Three  feet,  30  trips,  67  miles,  Walton  to  Bluefield,  on 
week  davs,  producing  6,030  car-foot  miles,  classified  as 

Three  feet,  5  trips,  160  miles,  the  entire  train  run,  pro- 
ducing 2,400  car-foot  miles. 

A  total  of  16,170  car-foot  miles,  and  Form  No.  6  of  the 
report  of  the  company  shows  that  one  sack  only  was  carried 
a  greater  part  of  the  time. 


314 

Question  (by  Mr.  Stewart).  The  result  of  that  is  that 
although  the  closed-pouch  unit  was  authorized  only  8 
miles,  did  you  say — — 

Answer.  Seven  miles. 

Question.  Seven  miles,  the  railroads  have  charged  the 
department  with  the  operation  of  that  space  the  whole 
outward  distance  and  tnc  whole  inward  distance? 

Answer.  Well,  I  have  not  reached  the  inward  distance 
yet.  I  have  just  covered  the  outward  distance,  train  17. 
1  was  just  coming  to  train  IS,  the  return  train. 

Question.  And  that  distance  is  how  much? 

Answer.   160  miles  for  the  entire  train  run. 

Train  IS,  tlie  return  train,  which  evidently  operates 
over  a  different  route  somewhat,  as  it  is  166  miles  long 
instead  of  160 — it  probably  operates  a  different  way  out 
of  Lynchburg  or  into  Lynchburg — has  a  3-foot  closed- 
pouch  unit  daily  except  Sunday  from  Pearisburg  to  Potts 
Valley  Junction,  a  distance  of  6  miles,  producing  540 
car-foot  miles. 

In  connection  with  this  train  was  claimed  3  feet  from 
Bluefield  to  Pearisburg,  35  trips,  33  miles,  producing  3,465 
car-foot  miles,  classified  as  ''A";  3  feet  on  Sundays  over 
the  6  miles  of  service,  producmg  90  car-foot  miles,  classi- 
fied as  "B";  and  3  feet  from  the  end  of  the  authorized 
service  to  the  end  of  the  train  run,  121  miles,  producing 
12,705  car-foot  miles;  a  total  of  16,260  car-foot  miles,  as 
against  540  authorized,  or  a  ratio  of  30  to  1. 

Train  16  operates  from  Columbus  to  Norfolk,  672  miles. 
This  train  has  a  full  railway  post-office  authorization  daily 
from  Columbus  to  Lynchburg,  46S  miles.  For  the  balance 
of  the  train  run,  204  miles,  a  30-foot  apartment  plus  a 
15-foot  miit  of  storage  over  the  same  distance  daily  except 
Sunday.  In  addition  there  is  a  15-foot  storage  authoriza- 
tion in  effect  from  Columbus  to  Bluefield  daily  over  a 
distance  of  314  miles.  10  feet  of  this  15  feet  is  carried  in 
the  excess  of  the  70-foot  railway  post-office  car  furnished, 

and  the  remaining  5  feet  is  carried  in  the  baggage  car 

***** 
eighty  per  cent  of  which  is  devoted  to  the  express  service. 

In  connection  with  this  5  feet  of  surplus  space  the  com- 
pany claims  the  following  unauthorized  operations  of 
space: 

Five  feet,  5  trips  over  the  distance  authorized  on  week 
days,  Columbus  to  Bluefield,  representing  the  Sunday 
movement,  314  miles,  producing  7,850  car-foot  miles, 
classified  as  "B." 


315 

Five  feet,  35  trips  over  the  balance  of  the  tram  run  on 
week  days,  Bluefield  to  Norfolk,  358  miles,  producing 
62,650  car-foot  miles,  classified  as  "A." 

In  train  15,  5  feet  for  35  trips,  as  return  movement, 
over  the  entire  train  run,  673  (R.  617  sic.)  miles,  producing 
117,775  car-foot  miles. 

Question  (by  Mr.  Wood)  .  What  train  was  that,  again  ? 

Answer.  16  and  15. 

Question.  And  how  far  did  you  carry  it  ? 

Answer.  Carry  what  ? 

Question.  The  train  from  Norfolk  to  Columbus? 

Answer.  Yes,  sir. 

Question.  What  did  you  say  the  authorization  was  there, 
Columbus  to  Lynchburg  ? 

Answer.  Full  railway  post  office. 

Question.  And  there  it  is  cut  down  to  a  30-foot  apart- 
ment and  15  feet  of  storage? 

Answer.  That  is  correct;  daily  except  Sunday — that  is, 
the  storage  is  daily  except  Sunday  and  the  apartment  is 
daily. 

Question.  They  run  the  railway  post-office  car  through 
to  carry  the  15  feet  of  storage  in  it.    Is  that  it  ? 

Answer.  Between  what? 

Question.  Lynchburg  and  Norfolk. 

Answer.  Yes,  sir;  I  assume  that  is  right. 

Question.  Then,  coming  back  they  have 

Answer.  No;  from  Lynchburg  to  Norfolk;  yes,  sir;  I 
assume  that  that  is  carried  in  the  full  car. 

Question.  Well,  they  operate  a  60-foot  car  all  the  way 
through,  then,  and  then  coming  back 

Answer  (interrupting).  A  70-foot  car  is  operated. 

Question.  Coming  back  they  have  a  30-foot  apartment 
authorized  as  far  as  Lynchburg  and  60-foot  railway  post 
office  from  Lynchburg  to  Columbus  ? 

Answer.  Yes,  sir.  And,  in  addition,  a  15-foot  storage 
authorization  from  Columbus  to  Bluefield. 

Question.  That  is  going  out,  on  train  16? 

Answer.  Yes,  sir. 

In  addition  to  the  above,  trains  15  and  16  show  in  column 
25-B  of  Form  3  the  space  representing  the  balance  of  the 
fuU  railway  post-office  car  run  between  Norfolk  and  Lynch- 
burg, 204  miles,  distance  over  which  the  full-car  authoriza- 
tion is  reduced  to  30-foot  apartment,  claiming  in  train  15 
the  balance  of  the  70-foot  car  daily,  205  miles,  producing 
275,930  car-foot  miles,  classified  as  "K." 

Train  16,  the  balance  of  the  70-foot  car  is  claimed  daily, 
204  miles,  producing  193,800  car-foot  miles,  also  classified 
as  "K,"  making  a  total  of  469,730  car-foot  miles. 


316 

They  also  show  on  the  same  route  unauthorized  space 
on  Form  2  as  the  result  of  the  operation  of  the  70-foot  full 
railway  post-office  cars,  as  follows: 

Ten" feet  excess  for  train  15,  163,800  car-foot  miles,  and 
in  train  16,  10  feet  excess  for  154  miles,  48,390  car-foot 
miles. 

I  want,  in  this  connection,  to  quote  the  total  space 
claims  for  trains  15  and  16:  Passenger,  2,078,832;  baggage, 
964,631;  miscellaneous,  123,270;  express,  2,502,605;  mail, 
authorized,  579,420. 

Mail  unauthorized  or  imoccupied — I  have  not  got  the 
unauthorized  total,  I  am  sorry  to  say — 681,920.  Unau- 
thorized and  unoccupied  shown  in  column  25  for  these  two 
trains  equals  1,132,705,  in  which  space  the  department 
participates  on  a  ratio  of  the  used  space  in  mixed  cars. 
(R.  3847-3853.) 

IN  CONNECTION  WITH  CLOSED-POUCH  SPACE  AUTHOR- 
IZATIONS. 

(A)  UNJUSTIFIED  AND  EXCESSIVE  CLAIMS  BY  RAIL- 
ROADS OF  UNUSED  AND  UNAUTHORIZED  SPACE 
OPERATION  IN  CONNECTION  WITH  CLOSED-POUCH 
SPACE   AUTHORIZED   A  PART  OF  THE  TIME. 

Mr.  McBride  testified  on  direct  examination  as  follows: 

The  Witness.  Referrhig  to  the  instructions  which  I  just 
read,  which  are  contained  in  paragraph  29-A  of  the  in- 
structions of  the  railway  mail  pay  committee: 

A  large  number  of  companies  gave  to  this  paragraph 
various  interpretations  which  the  department  regards  as 
resulting  in  mi  justifiable  and  excessive  claims  for  unau- 
thorized space  operations. 

Authorizations  for  closed-pouch  space  on  Sunday  only 
are  in  effect  on  a  large  number  of  railroad  mail  routes, 
many  of  which  have  railway  post-office  apartment  service 
authorized  on  week  days.  The  practice  was  followed  by 
many  of  the  roads  of  making  a  claim  for  the  miauthorized 
movement  of  units  of  space  of  the  size  authorized  on 
Sundays  for  all  of  the  week  days  of  the  period. 

I  cite  an  example  of  a  claim  of  this  character: 

Cleveland,  Cincinnati,  Chicago  &  St.  Louis  route  No. 
135510,  train  No.  24:  The  length  of  the  train  run  is  261 
miles.  There  is  a  3-foot  Sunday-only  authorization  over 
a  distance  of  79  miles.  There  is  an  authorization  of  the 
apartment  car  on  the  remaining  days  of  the  week. 


317 

The  company  claimed  for  the  3-foot  authorized  move- 
ment over  79  miles,  and  also  for  the  operation  of  that  3 
feet  of  space  over  the  balance  of  the  train  run,  182  miles, 
for  each  Sunday,  and  supplemented  that  claim  by  a  claim 
for  the  same  amount  of  space  for  the  30  week  days  of  the 
period  over  the  entire  distance,  261  miles.  The  authorized 
mail  service  amounted  to  1,185  car-foot  miles,  whereas 
the  claims  entered  as  being  necessary  in  connection  there- 
with consisted  of  a  total  of  26,220  car-foot  miles,  or  a 
ratio  of  22  to  1  between  the  unauthorized  space  claims 
and  the  space  actually  authorized. 

This  particular  claim  is  given  greater  significance  when 
it  is  shown  by  the  company's  o^vn  report,  on  R.  M.  P. 
Form  No.  6,  that  only  one  sack  (or  package)  was  carried 
on  the  train  in  question  on  Sundays.     (R.  479,  480.) 

CONTENTION  OF  DEPARTMENT  THAT  SPACE  SHOULD 
ONLY  HAVE  BEEN  CHARGED  ON  THE  DAYS  OPER- 
ATED. 

Mr.  McBride  on  direct  examination  testified  as  follows: 
Attorney  Examiner  Brown.  Let  us  get  right  there  the 
precise  contention  of  the  Post  Office  Department  in  regard 
to  this  matter,  and  the  contention  of  the  carriers.     Now, 
as  I  understand  it,  the  Post  Office  Department  authorized, 
we  will  say,  3  feet  of  space  on  Sunday.     Your  statement 
appears  to  indicate  here  that  the  carriers  seek  to  charge 
that  space  for  the  full  week. 
Answer.  Yes. 
***** 

Question.  And  the  contention  of  the  Post  Office  De- 
partment is  that  the  charge  should  be  for  only  the  space 
authorized  ? 

Answer.  Yes,  sir. 

Question.  The  carriers  stating  that,  having  authorized 
that  space  in  that  train,  it  was  necessary  to  make  a  charge 
for  it  for  the  six  days  that  it  was  not  demanded  by  the 
department  ? 

Answer.  Not  demanded  or  used. 

***** 

The  Witness.  I  will  ask  to  have  the  remainder  of  this 
table  inserted  in  the  record. 


318 

The  statement  referred  to  is  as  follows: 

Cases  ivhere  railroads  made  excessive  claims  of  unauthorized  space  in  con- 
nection with  authorized  closed-pouch  space,  and  the  ratios  between  the 
same: 


Koute 

Train 

No. 

No. 

149525 

633 

149525 

634 

147507 

607 

147507 

608 

149525 

635 

149525 

636 

147509 

775 

147509 

776 

135537 

47 

135537 

48 

131563 

6 

133524 

53 

133524 

58 

107582 

2 

107582 

47 

107582 

173 

107582 

185 

107582 

480 

155556 

37 

155535 

115-15 

155535 

116-16 

155556 

38 

Space 

Space  un- 

Ratio un- 

author- 

author- 

authorized 

ized 

ized 

to  au- 

(car-foot 

(car-foot 

thorized 

miles). 

miles). 

space. 

680 

9,735 

14. 7  to  1 

1,485 

8,910 

6.0  to  1 

780 

5,100 

6. 5  to  1 

780 

5,100 

6.5  to  1 

1,980 

11,880 

6.0  tol 

1,980 

11  880 

6.0  to  1 

720 

3,600 

5.0  tol 

720 

3,600 

5.0  tol 

420 

9,975 

23. 8  to  1 

90 

10,305 

114. 5  tol 

3,030 

18, 180 

6.0  tol 

870 

5,220 

6.0  tol 

870 

5,220 

6. 0  to  1 

1,395 

43, 125 

30. 9  to  1 

1,395 

8,370 

6.0  tol 

315 

8,820 

28.0  tol 

660 

3,300 

5. 0  to  1 

1,395 

8,370 

6. 0  to  1 

75 

10,665 

142. 2  tol 

810 

4,860 

6.0  tol 

810 

4,680 

6. 0  to  1 

360 

10,380 

28. 8  tol 

Chicago,  Rock  Island  &  Pacific 

Do 

Do 

Do 

Do 

Do 

St.  Louis  &.  San  Francisco 

Do 

Chicago  &  Alton 

Do 

Cincinnati,  Hamilton  &  Dayton... 
Baltimore  &  Ohio  Southwestern...! 

Do 

Erie  Railroad 

Do 

Do 

Do 

Do 

Missouri,  Kansas  &  Texas 

Do 

Do 

Do 


(R.  483-486.) 

(B)  ALTHOUGH  TRAIN  WOULD  HAVE  OPERATED  THE 
SAME  UNDER  WEIGHT  BASIS,  IN  THIS  ASCERTAIN- 
MENT THE  UNUSED  SPACE  IS  CHARGED  TO  MAILS 
BY  THE  RAILROADS  FOR  THE  PURPOSE  OF  FIXING 
RATE. 

Mr.  McBride  testified  on  direct  examination  as  follows: 

Question  (by  Attorney  Examiner  Brown).  Now,  right 
there,  that  difficulty  would  have  disappeared  if  you  had 
had  the  weight  basis,  would  it  not? 

Answer.  It  would;  yes,  sir. 

Question.  There  is  an  instance  where  the  weight  would 
operate  as  between  the  Government  and  the  carriers,  per- 
haps, more  equitably  than  space  ? 

Answer.  Under  the  weight  basis  that  pouch  or  sack  would 
have  been  carried  and  its  weight  would  nave  been  included 
in  the  other  weights  for  which  compensation  was  paid. 

Question  (by  Mr.  wStewart).  Just  a  moment.  If  we 
determine  what  the  difficulty  is,  perhaps  it  might  remove 
the  misapprehension.  The  difficulty  here  is  the  charging 
against  tJie  mails  of  this  operation.     Now,  Mr.  McBride, 


319 

under   the   weight    basis,   would    not    the  raih'oads   have 
operated  the  train  just  as  they  did  in  this  case? 
Answer.  Just  the  same. 
***** 

Question.  The  only  difference,  then,  is  that  under  the 
space  basis,  they  have  sought  to  charge  against  the  mails 
this  excess  operation  which  they  would  continue  anyway, 
under  any  system;  but  under  this  system  they  seek  to 
charge  it  against  the  mails  for  the  purpose  of  fixing  a 
higher  rate  under  space  ? 

Answer.  That  is  correct.     (R.  480,  481.) 

(C)   EXCESSIVE        AND        UNECONOMICAL       OPERATION 
SHOULD    NOT    BE    CHARGED    TO    THE    MAILS. 

Mr.  Gaines  testified  on  cross-examination  as  follows: 

Question  (by  Mr.  Wood)  .  Now,  the  fact  is  that  under 
the  space  basis  as  it  is  operated  to-day,  the  railroad  com- 
pany does  not  get  paid  for  all  of  the  equipment  which  it 
hauls  solely  on  account  of  the  mail  service  ? 

Answer."  It  is  gettuig  paid  for  aU  of  the  space  it  is  re- 
quired to  haul. 

Mr.  Wood.  Well,  Mr.  Reporter,  will  you  please  read  that 
question:  I  purposely  omitted  the  use  of  the  word  ''re- 
quired," because  I  knew  you  and  I  would  not  agree  on  its 
definition.  So  I  will  ask  the  reporter  to  read  my  question" 
over  again. 

***** 

(Tlie  reporter  read  the  question  as  above  recorded.) 

Answer.  No ;  if  the  railway  company  elects  to  haul  a  car 
1,000  miles  to  take  care  of  service  that  we  need  200  miles, 
it  should  not  be  paid  *  *  *  it  does  seem  to  me  that 
there  is  no  reason  why  the  department  should  pay  for 
space  which  it  does  not  need,  because  the  raih'oad  com- 
pany, for  its  own  convenience,  wanted  to  haul  equipment 
1,000  miles.  In  that  particular  case,  it  would  go  over 
three  railroad  systems.     (R.  194,  195.) 

Mr.  Gaines  testified  on  re-direct  examination  that  the 
railroads  are  paid  for  the  service  performed,  but  for  their 
own  convenience  sometimes  carry  larger  cars  than  needed 
over  parts  of  runs,  as  follows: 

Question  (by  Mr.  Stewart).  Now,  Mr.  Gaines,  you  said 
something  about  the  company  not  getting  paid  for  aU  the 
equipment  used,  in  response  to  counsel's  question.  I  want 
to  ask  you  if  it  is  not  true  that  you  mean  they  do  not  get 
paid  at  the  maximum  rate  for  all  of  the  car  movement  t;he 


320 

company  chooses  to  make,  whether  tlie  department  uses 
the  space  or  not  ? 

Answer.  I  beheve  that  that  was  really  covered  in  my 
statement  on  cross-examination. 

Question.  I  wanted  to  clear  up  your  question  on  cross- 
examination.  It  seems  to  me  that  it  was  left  imperfect  in 
that  respect. 

Answer.  If  I  understand  the  question  now,  Mr.  Stewart, 
I  wt)uld  say  that  the  railroad  companies  are  paid  for  the 
service  we  require  them  to  render.  In  some  cases,  for 
their  own  convenience,  they  carry  larger  cars  than  we  need, 
or  than  we  ask  for  over  certain  portions  of  long  runs. 
*     *     *     (R.  225,  226.) 

(D)  CLOSED-POUCH  UNITS  CARRIED  IN  BAGGAGE  CARS 
THAT  ARE  OPERATED.  UNJUSTIFIED  CHARGE  TO 
THE  MAILS  OF  UNUSED  SPACE  REPORTED  IN  CON- 
NECTION WITH  CLOSED-POUCH  UNITS  AUTHORIZED 
IN  BAGGAGE  CARS  WHICH  WOULD  BE  OPERATED  IF 
NO  AUTHORIZATIONS  WERE  MADE. 

'Ml.  McBride  testified  on  direct  examination  as  foUows: 

Question  (by  Attorney  Examiner  Brown).  Now,  when 
you  authorize  that  3  feet  of  space,  you  do  not  specify  that 
it  shall  be  an  apartment  car  or  a  railway  post-office  car, 
or  any  kind  of  a  car,  do  you  ? 

Answer.  Not  closed-pouch  space;  no,  sir. 

Question.  That  can  be  put  in  a  baggage  car  ? 

Answer.  It  is  carried  in  a  baggage  car. 

***** 

Mr.  Wood.  Never  in  a  railway  post-office  or  an  apart- 
ment car  ? 

The  Witness.  Closed-pouch  space  is  on  trains  in  which 
there  is  no  full  car  or  apartment  car  operated.  The  law 
specifies  that. 

Question  (by  Attorney  Exammer  Brown).  WeU,  that 
being  so,  the  theory  is  that  that  baggage  car  is  running 
anyhow.  It  is  running  on  Sundays  as  well  as  on  week 
days,  and  if  the  Post  Office  Department  had  never  asked 
for  any  space  in  that  car,  or  had  never  used  it,  the  car 
would  still  run  ? 

Answer.  Yes,  sir;  that  is  true. 

Question.  That  is  your  contention  ? 

Answer.  That  is  our  contention.     (R.  487,488.) 


321 

tE>  PRONOUNCED  EXCESSIVE  CLAIMS  FOR  UNUSED 
SPACE  IN  CONNECTION  WITH  CLOSED-POUCH  AU- 
THORIZATIONS AND  RATIO  OF  SAME  TO  AUTHORIZED 
SPACE. 

Mr.  McBride  testified  on  direct  examination  as  follows: 

The  WiTXESs.  The  most  pronounced  excessive  claim  of 
the  character  of  those  above  outlined  is  encountered  on 
route  Xo.  133516  on  the  Cleveland,  Cincinnati,  Chicago  & 
St.  Louis  Raihvay,  where  train  Xo.  18  was  authoiized  to 
carry  a  3-foot  unit  of  closed  pouch  space  Sundays  only  for 
only  18  miles  of  its  total  train  run  of  211  miles.  The 
authorized  service  produced  a  total  of  270  car-foot  miles 
*  *  *  *  * 

*  *  *  Unauthorized  space  movements  claimed  in  con- 
nection with  the  foregoing-  service  consist  of  a  charge  for 
the  3  feet  over  the  193  miles  remainder  of  the  train  run 
and  30  days  operation  of  the  space  over  the  entire  run  of 
211  miles,  an  aggregate  of  21,885  car-foot  miles. 

The  ratio  in  this  case  is  81  to  1,  but  the  disparity  becomes 
the  more  striking  when  it  is  shown  that  the  company  re- 
ported on  R.  M.  P.  Form  Xo.  6  only  one  sack  (or  package) 
of  mail  carried  in  this  unit  of  space,  and  investigation 
disclosed  that  it  consisted  of  a  bundle  of  news]ia]iers  from 
Chicago.  The  ratio  between  the  space  actually  occuj  ied 
by  this  mail  and  the  space  which  the  company  claims,  in 
efifect,  to  have  necessaril}'  reserved  in  connection  therewith, 
approximates  1  to  3,600. 

I  want  to  further  state  in  connection  with  these  that  I 
have  just  read  that  in  every  case  there  is  an  apartment 
car  run  on  the  other  days  of  the  week  in  the  train.  (R. 
487,  488.) 

(F)  EXCESSIVE  CLAIMS  OF  UNAUTHORIZED  SPACE  IN 
CONNECTION  WITH  CLOSED-POUCH  AUTHORIZATIONS 
IN  TRAINS  AUTHORIZED  TO  CARRY  MAILS  OVER  POR- 
TION OF  TRAIN  RUN. 

Mr.  McBride  testified  on  direct  examination  as  follows: 
Paragraph  29A  of  the  instructions  outlines  a  method  for 
making  claims  in  connection  with  mail-service  authoriza- 
tions on  trains  authorized  to  carry  mail  units  over  a  por- 
tion of  the  train  run. 

A  construction  placed  upon  this  paragraph  by  a  large 
number  of  the  companies  resulted  in  its  application  to 
cases  where  the  authorized  miles  of  service  constituted 
only  a  small  fraction  of  the  total  train  run.     Excessive 

122698—19 21 


322 

claims  under  this  construction  are  cited  in  the  following 
cases : 

Train  No.  474  on  route  No.  143508  of  the  Chicago,  Rock 
Island  &  Pacific  has  a  3-foot  dail^^-except-Sunday  authori- 
zation for  5  miles  of  its  177-mile  train  run. 

The  compan3^'s  report  on  Form  No.  6  shows  that  the 
maximum  number  of  sacks  carried  on  this  train  was  14, 
with  a  minimum  of  9,  and  therefore  the  maximum  require- 
ment onl}"  amounted  to  one-third  of  the  space  provided 
by  a  3-foot  authorization,  basing  that  statement  on  the 
15  sacks  to  the  foot.  Notwithstanding  this  fact  the  com- 
pany has  claimed,  in  connection  with  its  5  miles  of  au- 
thorized service  producing  450  car-foot  miles,  "a  necessary 
operation  of  the  space  unit"  over  unauthorized  trackage 
of  172  miles,  making  an  aggregate  of  15,480  car-foot 
miles.  The  ratio  between  the  latter  and  the  authorized 
totalis  34.4  to  1. 

I  have  a  short  table  listing  some  other  typical  cases  of 
the  kind — on  the  Great  Northern,  the  Baltimore  &  Ohio, 
and  the  Rock  Island  lines^ — and  I  would  ask  to  have  that 
incorporated. 

(Tlie  statement  referred  to  is  as  follows :) 


Route 

No. 

Train 

No.- 

Spa^e  au- 
thorized. 

Space  unau- 
thorized. 

Ratio 

unau- 
thorized 

to  au- 
thorized 

.space. 

Railroad. 

Mies. 

Car- 
foot 
miles. 

Miles. 

Car- 
foot 
miles. 

141537 
113515 
14350S 
14154fi 
113515 
141.537 
161525 
14.3.558 

199 
150 
475 
113 
164 
200 
209 
3 

24 

4 
5 
4 
4 

24 
4 

29 

2,160 
360 
4.50 
360 
360 

2,160 
360 

6.090 

192 
14 

172 
26 
18 

192 
74 

17, 280 
1,530 

15.480 
2,340 
1,530 

17:280 
6,660 

8. 0  to  1 

4. 2  to  1 

Chicago,  Roclv  Island  &  Pacific . . 

34. 4  to  1 
6. 5  to  1 

4. 2  to  1 

Great  Northern 

8. 0  to  1 

Do 

18. 5  to  1 

Chicago,  Roclv  Island  &  Pacific . . 

308 

76.475 

12. 6  to  1 

The  Witness.  The  unjustified  nature  of  the  above  claims 
is  further  emphasized  by  the  fact  that  in  the  case  of  routes 
Nos.  141546  and  161525  the  company  reports  on  R.  M.  P. 
Form  No.  6  only  one  sack  (or  package)  as  being  carried 
over  the  authorized  distance,  while  both  Baltimore  &  Oliio 
cases  cited  shoM'  a  maximum  of  6  sacks.     (R.  495-498.) 


(G)  EXCESSIVE  CLAIMS  OF  RETURN  MOVEMENT  OF  UN- 
AUTHORIZED SPACE  CLAIMED  IN  CONNECTION  WITH 
CLOSED-POUCH  SERVICE  AUTHORIZATIONS. 

Mr.  McBride  testified  on  direct  examination  as  follows: 

Another  class  of  excessive  claims  frequently  encountered 
consisted  of  cases  embracing  not  only  tne  features  outlined 
in  the  foregoing  statement,  but  combining,  in  addition, 
claims  for  the  return  movement  of  space  for  the  full  35-day 
period. 

Route  No.  133526  on  the  Big  Four  presents  a  typical  case 
of  this  character  in  connection  with  a  Sunday-only  authori- 
zation for  a  3-foot  unit  of  closed-pouch  space  on  train  Xo. 
39  over  a  distance  of  147  miles.  The  length  of  the  train 
run  is  157  miles,  and  the  unauthorized  claim  for  the  remain- 
ing 10  miles  on  the  5  Sundays  is  supplemented  by  an 
entry  covering  the  30  week-day  movements  in  train  No.  39 
of  the  space  over  the  entire  train  run,  and  by  an  entry 
claiming  the  return  of  the  space  in  train  No.  40  for  35 
trips  of  157  miles. 

The  aggregate  of  these  thi-ee  unauthorized  space  claims 
is  30,765  car-foot  miles — an  amount  14  times  as  great  as 
that  arising  from  the  actual  mail  service  performed. 

Route  No.  131562  for  the  same  company  is  identical, 
except  for  the  fact  that  a  greater  volume  of  mail  is  carried 
thereon. 

Train  Xo.  9  on  this  route  has  a  3-foot  Sunday-only 
authorization  for  a  distance  of  109  miles,  the  operation 
(3  feet  by  5  trips  by  109  miles)  producing  a  total  of  1,635 
car-foot  miles  for  the  authorized  service.  The  unauthor- 
ized claims  in  connection  thercM'ith  are  as  follows: 

Balance  of  car  run  on  train  Xo.  9,  3  feet  by  5  trips  by 
27  miles,  405  car-foot  miles. 

Operation  of  space  over  entire  train  run  on  week  days, 
3  feet  by  30  trips  by  136  miles,  12,240  car-foot  miles. 

Return  of  space  on  trains  Xos.  4  and  12,  3  feet  by  35 
trips  by  136  miles,  14,280  car-foot  miles. 

Total  unauthorized  space  claimed,  26,925  car-foot  miles, 
the  ratio  being  16  to  1. 

I  have  a  table  here,  as  well,  showing  other  cases  of  the 
same  general  character. 

For  instance,  on  Great  Xorthern  route  Xo.  161518,  trains 
Nos.  207  and  208,  in  which  there  are  1,095  car-foot  niiles 
of  authorized  space  in  train  No.  207,  and  unauthorized 
claims  of  5,475  car-foot  miles  in  train  No.  207,  and  6,570 
in  train  208;  the  return  making  a  tottil  of  over  12,000  car- 
foot  miles,  a  ratio  of  1 1  to  1 . 


324 

The  other  cases  are  similar  and  show  ratios  as  high  as 
12.6  to  1. 
I  ask  that  that  be  incor])orated  with  my  statement. 
(The  statement  referred  to  is  as  follows:) 


Railroad. 

Route 
No. 

Train 

No. 

Author- 
ized 

(car-foot 
milec). 

Unau- 
thorized 

(car-foot 
miles). 

Ratio  un- 
authorized 
to  author- 
ized space. 

Great  Northern 

161518 

{ 

207 
208 

1,095 

5,475 
6,570 

Total 

1,095 

12,045 

11.0  to  1 

161517 

{ 

173 
172 

1,080 

5.400 
4,590 

1,080 

9,990 

9.3  to  1 

1.57530 

{ 

.517 
518 

1.530 

7,650 
1,530 

Return  movement. 

Total..            .' 

1,530 

9,180 

6.0  to  1 

171.529 

{ 

253 
254 

Great  Northern 

2,055 

10,275 
12,330 

Total 

2,055 

22, 605 

ll.Otol 

161.512 

{ 

217 

218 

Great  Northern 

915 

4,575 
.5.490 

Total 

915 

10,065 

11.0  to  1 

170513 

{ 

24 
23 

Oregon- Washington  Railway  &  Nav- 
igation 

750 

4,350 
5, 100 

Return  movement 

Total . 

750 

9,450 

12. 6  to  1 

101501 

{ 

195 
196 

2,130 

10,314 
12,780 

Total 

2,130 

23,094 

10.  8  to  1 

161516 

{ 

213 
214 

1,200 

6,000 
7,200 

Return  movement. 

1,200 

13,200 

ll.Otol 

161531 

{ 

197 
198 

Great  Northern.. 

1,965 

9,825 
11,790 

Return  movement 

1,965 

21,615 

ll.Otol 

165519 

{ 

103 
104 

l^nion  Pacifir 

3,710 

22,260 
13,250 

Total . 

3.710 

35,510 

9. 6  1 0  1 

107519 

{ 

173 
174 

480 

2,880 
480 

480 

3,360 

7. 0  to  1 

(R.  488-493.) 


325 

(H)  EXCESSIVE  CLAIMS  OF  UNAUTHORIZED  SPACE  OUT- 
WARD AND  UNAUTHORIZED  RETURN  SPACE  IN  CON- 
NECTION WITH  TRAINS  CARRYING  CLOSED-POUCH 
AUTHORIZATIONS  OVER  PARTS  OF  RUNS. 

Mr.  McBride  testified  on  direct  examination  as  follows: 

Another  class  of  excessive  claims  embodies  the  character- 
istics which  are  described  as  applying  to  the  foregoing 
group,  combining  therewith  the  additional  feature  of  a 
charge  for  the  return  movement  of  the  unauthorized  space 
over  the  entire  mileage  of  a  complementar}^  train  run. 

In  the  table,  which  I  will  ask  to  have  incorporated  in  my 
statement,  there  are  a  number  of  typical  cases  presenting 
claims  of  this  character  that  show  that  in  no  case  did  the 
maximum  number  of  mail  sacks  carried  over  the  short 
distance  authorized  require  more  than  one-quarter  of  the 
space  provided  by  the  authorized  mail  unit:  that  in  those 
cases  marked  with  an  asterisk  the  company's  report  on 
Form  No.  6  indicates  that  the  mail  was  carried  in  an  over- 
sized railway  post-office  apartment  and  should  have  no 
space — authorized  or  unauthorized — charged  to  any  part 
of  the  car  outside  of  the  excess  apartment. 

I  mil  read  one  or  two  of  the  cases: 

Oregon-Washington  Railroad  &  Navigation  Co.,  route 
170515,  train  15,  has  an  authorization  for  7  miles,  resulting 
in  630  car-foot  miles.  The  additional  space  claimed  in 
connection  with  that  was  for  35  miles  additional  operation 
of  3.150  car-foot  miles  and  the  return  for  the  entire  42  miles, 
make  a  total  of  6,930  car-foot  miles — a  ratio  of  11  to  1. 

The  maximum  number  of  sacks  carried  on  any  day  of 
the  period  during  which  the  count  was  kept  was  1  piece. 

Chicago,  Rock  Island  &  Pacific,  route  No.  143558,  a  3-foot 
authorization  for  30  trips  for  29  miles,  resulting  in  6,090 
car-foot  miles  of  authorized  space.  The  claims  in  con- 
nection \vith  that  are  for  the  308  miles  remaining  of  the 
run,  resulting  in  64,680  car-foot  miles,  and  the  same  for 
the  entire  distance  on  Sundays,  resulting  in  11,795  car- 
foot  miles,  and  the  return  movement  of  35  trips  over  the 
entire  mileage,  82,565  car-foot  miles,  making  a  total  of 
159,040  car-foot  miles  of  space  claimed  in  connection  with 
the  mail  service,  as  against  6,090  authorized  service — a 
ratio  of  26  to  1.  And  these  mails  were  all  carried  in  an 
oversized  apartment  car,  the  excess  space  in  which  is  also 
claimed  in  connection  with  mail  service  in  column  12. 

Pennsylvania  Co.,  route  131551,  train  No.  9,  25  trips  for 
40  miles  of  authorized  service,  resulting  in  3,000  car-foot 
miles    of    authorized    service.     The    unauthorized    space 


see 

claimed  in  connection  with  this  operation  amounts  to 
95,280  car-foot  miles  over  the  entire  mileage  of  the  run, 
which  is  468  miles,  and  is  of  the  same  general  character  as 
the  case  I  just  read,  resulting  in  a  ratio  of  31  to  1.  The 
maximum  number  of  sacks  carried  in  this  authorization 
during  the  statistical  period  was  1  sack. 

I  ask  to  have  this  table  incorporated  also. 

(The  statement  referred  to  is  as  follows:) 


3.1 2  J 


327 


HL 


1 1 


iSi 


^•"-s 


Id       11^ 


BS 


.3  f 
1^ 


i§i 


lis 


S5g 


a  a 


2    |E    2    «E 

5      z^-?      :£ 


^S    J 


:^  ft 


.2  o  a  o  CO 


s-isl 


•  o 


ea  o  3  t. 


328 


88 


§i 


SS 


ss 


•2^ 

.^1 


2z 


SS 


ss 


.22  C 

ga 


3  lie  3  ^-i  1 


329 

(R.  498-502.) 

.  I )  EXCE SSIVE  CLAIMS  OF  UNAUTHORIZED  AND  UNUSED 
SPACE    CITED    FAIRLY    DESCRIPTIVE    AND    REPRE- 
SENTATIVE OF  MANNER  IN  WHICH  THE  RAILROADS 
GENERALLY  REPORTED  AND  CLAIMED  THE  UNAU- 
THORIZED SPACE. 
Mr.  McBride  testified  on  direct  examination  as  follows: 
Question  (by  Mr.  Stewart).     I  will  ask  you,  Mr.  Mc- 
Bride, if  these  examples  are  fairly  descriptive  and  repre- 
sentative   of    the    manner   in    which    the    railroads   have 
generally  reported   and   claimed   the  unauthorized   space 
tabulated  ? 

Answer.  In  answer  to  that,  I  will  state  that  we  did  not, 
by  any  means,  tabulate  all  of  the  cases  which  came  to 
our  attention  during  the  examination  of  the  reports.  I 
do  not  think  all  the  roads  went  to  the  extent  that  some  of 
them  did  in  making  these  claims.  I  will  not  say  that  it 
was  characteristic  of  all  the  reports,  but  of  a  ^reat  majority 
of  the  companies  this  was  the  manner  in  which  they  made 
these  claims.     (R.  503.) 

(J)  UNAUTHORIZED     SPACE     CLAIMS     IN     CONNECTION 

WITH       CLOSED-POUCH      SPACE      AUTHORIZATIONS. 

PENNSYLVANIA     CO.       (POSTOFFICE      DEPARTMENT 

EXHIBITS     86     AND     87.) 

Mr.  McBride  testified  on  direct  examination  as  follows: 

Now  when  we  go  into  the  claims  for  unauthorized  space 

in  connection  with  closedT-pouch  space  we  find  some  even 

more  startling  claims. 

I  will  invite  your  attention  first  to  Pennsylvania  Co. 
route  131551,  trains  9  and  8,  and  I  ask  to  have  this  chart 
received  and  marked  Exhibit  86. 

***** 

This  train  (9)  is  operated  between  Pittsburgh  and  Chicago, 
468  miles.  The  only  mail  authorization  in  either  one  of 
these  trains  is  a  3-foot  closed-pouch  unit  25  trips  from 
Pittslmrgh  to  New  Galilee,  40  miles,  resulting  in  3,000 
car-foot  miles  of  authorized  service. 

In  connection  with  this  authorization  the  company  has 
claimed  the  operation  of  this  3-foot  of  space  for  25  trips 
over  the  balance  of  the  train  run,  producing  32,100  car- 
foot  miles,  has  claimed  the  operation  of  3  feet  of  space  10 
trips  over  the  entire  mileage,  468  miles,  producing  14,040 
car-foot  miles,  and  has  claimed  in  tram  8,  the  return 
movement,  the  3  feet  of  space  for  35  trips,  468  miles,  pro- 
ducing   49,140    car-foot    miles,    resulting    for    these    two 


330 

trains  in  a  claim  of  95,280  car-foot  miles  of  unauthorized 
space  to  3,000  car-foot  miles  of  authorized  space,  or  a 
ratio  of  31.8  to  1. 

Question  (by  Mr.  Stewart).  I  suppose  that  illustrates 
the  railroads'  theoiy  that  when  the  closed-pouch  unit  is 
authorized  anywhere  on  the  run  the  space  must  be  reserved 
for  the  mails  outbound  as  far  as  the  train  may  run, and  on 
the  return  trip  also  ? 

Answer.  And  also  those  particular  claims  involve  the 
claim  that  they  find  it  necessary  to  run  that  3-foot  space 
on  other  days  when  the  mails  are  not  authorized,  because 
of  that  3-foot  authorization  for  40  miles. 

Question.  On  some  other  days? 

Answer.  On  some  other  days. 

*  *  *  *  5): 

Question  (interrupting).  How  many  pouches  were  car- 
ried on  that  train,  Mr.  McBride,  under  the  authorization  of 
a  3-foot  unit  for  40  miles  between  Pittsburgh  and  New 
GaHlee« 

Answer.  The  claims  become  even  more  preposterous  when 
it  is  shown  that  the  average  amount  of  mail  on  train  9  over 
the  J^O  miles  was  one  sacJc  per  day.*  One  sack  of  mail  was 
carried  from  Pittsburgh  to  New  Galilee,  and  in  conse- 
quence of  that  one  sack  being  carried  we  are  charged  with 
95,280  car-foot  miles  of  unauthorized  space. 

Question  (by  Mr.  Wood).  That  is  the  same  kind  of  a 
case  that  you  discussed  when  you  were  on  the  stand  before, 
and  you  gave  me  at  that  time  what  the  total  amount  was 
involved  in  cases  of  that  kind.  Will  you  give  me  that 
again  ? 

Answer.  I  don't  know  that  I  have  that  here. 

Question.  It  was  very  insignificant,  as  I  remember. 

Answer.  Operations  of  this  kind  I  don't  think  are  insig- 
nificant. In  the  storage  and  closed-pouch  space  they  are 
very  frequent.  They  occur  on  very  many  routes.  In  the 
testimony  that  I  gave  before  I  did  cite  a  number  of  cases 
similar  to  this,  although  I  did  not  recite  them  all. 

Question  (by  Mr.  Stewart)  .  And  this  and  like  cases  all 
enter  into  the  basis  which  the  railroads  are  urging  as  the 
guide  for  fixing  the  rates  for  carrying  the  mails  ? 

Answer.  Not  only  that,  but  space  of  this  character  entered 
into  the  car-foot  miles  which  formed  the  percentage  for  the 
division  of  the  unoccupied  space  in  mixed  cars* 

Question.  Loaded  both  ways  ?  .  .      \       . 

Answer.  Served  to  increase  the  mail  participation  in  such 
unoccupied  space*     (R.  3841-3844.) 


'Italics  are  the  Department's. 


mi 

Mr.  McBride  testified  also  on  direct  examination: 

*  *  *  I  would  like  to  invite  your  attention  to 
another  case  on  this  same  route,  Pennsylvania  Co.  131551, 
and  have  prepared  a  chart  in  this  case  which  I  will  ask  to 
have  received  as  Exhibit  87. 

***** 

*  *  *  This  chart  relates  to  trains  115  and  142,  trains 
running  between  Chicago  and  Pittsburgh.  The  authorized 
mail  space  in  these  trains  is  as  follows:  3  feet  between 
Gar}'  and  Valparaiso,  29  trips,  16  miles;  and  3  feet, 
19  miles,  between  Columbia  City  and  Fort  Wayne. 

Unauthorized  movements  claimed  in  connection  with 
this  authorized  space  are  as  follows :  Between  Chicago  and 
Gary,  27  miles;  between  Valparaiso  and  Columbia  City,  85 
miles;  and  between  Fort  Wayne  and  Pittsburgh,  321  miles. 
On  train  142  there  is  no  authorization  of  mail  space,  but  3 
feet  for  the  entire  period  in  that  train,  resulting  in  a  claim 
of  49,140  car-foot  miles  in  that  train.  In  both  trains  the 
authorized  oar-foot  mileage  equaled  3,330,  and  the  unau- 
thorized mileage  equaled  94,509,  or  a  ratio  of  28.4  to  1. 

Question  (by  Mr.  Stewart)  .  That  is  the  same  kind  of  a 
case  as  the  other? 

Answer.  The  same  kind  as  the  other.  The  reason  there 
were  only  34  trips  shown  is  because  the  car  was  shopped 
at  Fort  Wayne  on  April  7.  The  disparity  between  these 
unauthorized  and  authorized  claims  is  shown  to  be  more 
striking  when  you  examine  the  companj-'s  report  on  Form 
No.  6,  showing  that  a  maximum  of  nine  sacks  was  carried 
on  this  train  at  any  time  during  the  statistical  period. 

Question.  What  was  the  minimum  ? 

Answer.  One  sack.  As  in  the  other  case,  all  of  this  item 
of  94,000  car-foot  miles  was  included  in  the  car-foot  miles 
forming  the  percentage  of  9  and  a  fraction  upon  which  basis 
the  railroad's  plan  divides  the  operating  expenses  aiul  other 
matters,  and  also  was  included  in  the  lasis  for  the  ditnsion 
of  the  unoccupied  space  of  this  system  *     (R.  3844-3846.) 

(K)  UNAUTHORIZED  SPACE  CLAIMS  IN  CONNECTION 
WITH  CLOSED-POUCH  SPACE  AUTHORIZATIONS.  BIG 
FOUR  RAILROAD. 

Mr.  McBride  testified  on  direct  examination  as  follows: 

This  case  is  similar  to  that  on  route  133516  of  the  Cleve- 
land, Cincinnati,  Chicago  &  St.  Louis  Railway,  where  train 
18  is  authorized  to  carry  a  3-foot  unit  of  closed-pouch 
space  Sundays  only  for  18  miles  of  its  total  train  run  of  211 

*  Italics  are  the  Department's. 


332 

miles.  This  produced  a  total  of  270  car-foot  miles  author- 
ized. The  unauthorized-space  claim  in  connection  with 
this  service  consists  of  a  charge  for  the  3  feet  of  space  for 
the  193  miles,  the  remainder  of  the  train  run,  and  30  days' 
operation  of  the  space  over  the  entire  run  of  211  miles, 
that  covering  the  remaining  days  of  the  period  when  ho 
mails  were  carried  in  this  car,  there  being  an  apartment 
car  operated  there  during  the  week. 

As  in  the  other  cases,  but  one  sack  of  mail  was  carried 
on  any  day  *  *  *  on  this  train,  according  to  the  report 
of  the  company. 

Another  case  like  that  is  that  of  train  39  of  the  Big  Four, 
where  the  authorization  consists  of  a  3-foot  unit  of  closed- 
pouch  space,  on  Sundays  only,  over  a  distance  of  147  miles. 
The  train  run  is  157  miles  long,  and  the  unauthorized  claim 
for  the  remaining  10  miles  on  the  five  Sundays  is  supple- 
mented by  an  entry  covering  the  30  week-day  movements 
over  the  entire  train  run  and  by  an  entry  in  train  No.  40 
covering  the  3-foot  unit  for  the  entire  35  trips  over  the 
entire  mileage.     *     *     *     (R.  3846,  3847.) 

(L^  CLAIMS  OY  UNAUTHORIZED  SPACE  IN  CONNECTION 
WITH  CLOSED  -  POUCH  SPACE  AUTHORIZATIONS, 
NORTHERN   PACIFIC   RAILWAY. 

Mr.  McBride  testified  on  direct  examination  as  follows  : 

In  the  closed-pouch  service  these  conditions  also  obtain. 
On  the  Northern  Pacific,  route  171502,  train  593,  operated 
between  Chehalis  and  South  Bend,  Wash.,  the  authoriza- 
tion is  a  7-foot  closed-pouch  service,  Sundays  only,  56 
miles,  producing  1,960  car-foot  miles.  There  was  claimed 
the  operation  of  this  7-foot  closed-pouch  unit  for  the  re- 
maining 30  trips  over  the  same  mileage,  producing  11,760 
car-foot  miles. 

Question.  That  is  for  the  week  days  ? 

Answer.  That  is  correct.     (R.  3858,  3859.) 

EMERGENCY    SERVICE. 

(A)  EXCESSIVE  CLAIMS  OF  UNAUTHORIZED  SPACE  IN 
CONNECTION  WITH  EMERGENCY  SPACE  AUTHORIZA- 
TIONS. 

Mr,  McBride  testified  on  direct  examination  as  follows: 
I  would  like  to  next  take  up  the  question  of  unauthor- 
ized claims  in  connection  with  emergency  authorizations. 

I  want,  first,  to  state  that  emergency  authorizations, 
except  in  cases  where  a  full  car  of  emergency  mails  is 
requested,  is  always  taken  care  of  in  the  regular  consist  of 


333 

the  train.  Therefore  the  claim  can  not  be  made  that  the 
operation  of  the  space  occupied  by  emergency  mail  is  a 
necessary  operation,  as  the  space  is  already  in  the  car  and 
the  train,  and  would  still  be  operated  whether  the  emer- 
gency mails  were  carried  or  not.  With  even  less  reason 
can  it  be  asserted  that  the  operation  of  space  represented 
by  emergency  authorizations  over  the  remaining  car  run  or 
in  the  return  direction  is  a  necessary  operation  on  account 
of  the  mail  service.  The  railroads,  however,  in  many 
cases  not  only  charged  the  space  authorized,  with  which 
I  have  no  quarrel,  but  have  claimed  the  amount  of  space 
occupied  by  the  emergency  authorization  over  the  re- 
mainder of  the  car  run,  and  the  return  movement  over  the 
entire  run.  All  of  this  space  was  included  in  the  basis  for 
charging  to  the  mails  a  part  of  the  unoccupied  space  in  the 
mixed  cars,  thus  increasing  the  mail  percentage  of  partici- 
pation*   (R.  3866.) 

Southern  Railway: 

I  want  to  call  particular  attention  to  the  case  of  the 
Southern  Railway,  route  114527.  Tram  No.  9  operates 
daily  from  Washington  to  Danville,  238  miles.  A  3-foot 
unit  of  closed-pouch  space  is  authorized  m  that  train  daily 
except  Sunday.  In  connection  with  that  train,  the  rail- 
road has  claimed  the  operation  of  this  3  feet  of  space  daily 
except  Sunday,  resulting  in  21,420  car-foot  miles. 

Question  (by  Mr.  Wood).  That  is  from  Washmgton  to 
where  ? 

^Vjiswer.  To  Danville.  This  is  one  case  where  the  com- 
pany failed  to  claim  the  operation  of  this  space  on  Sundays. 
I  don't  know  how  to  account  for  it. 

Question  (by  Mr.  Stewart).  Did  the  railway  mail  pay 
committee  discover  it? 

Answer.  It  was  not  brought  to  our  attention.  If  it 
had  been  we  would  have  changed  it  in  accordance  with 
the  rule  which  they  had  been  foUowmg. 

The  car  operated  in  this  train  ranges  from  39  feet  for 
9  trips  to  64  feet  for  16  trips,  a  44-foot  car  operating  on 
six  davs  and  a  60-foot  car  on  four  days. 

Question  (by  Mr.  Wood).  What  do  those  figures  mean? 

Answer.  Forty-four-foot  on  six  days  and  60-foot  on 
four  days.  Sixteen  feet  of  baggage  was  charged  every 
(hiv,  there  being  unoccupied  space  as  follows: 

Nine  days,  20  feet,  42,000  car-foot  miles. 

Six  days,  25  feet,  35,000  car-foot  miles. 

Four  da3's,  41  feet  of  unoccupied  space,  39,000  car-foot 
miles. 

♦Italics  are  the  Department's. 


334 

On  11  trips,  45  feet  of  unoccupied  space,  117,000  car- 
foot  miles. 

On  5  days,  48  feet  of  unoccupied  space,  59,000  car-foot 
miles. 

A  total  of  292,000  car-foot  miles  of  unoccupied  space. 

We  now  come  to  the  emergency.  During  this  period  a 
number  of  3-foot  emergency  space  units  wore  carried  on 
this  train  on  various  dates  for  various  distances  out  of 
Washington. 

On  April  13,  one  such  unit  is  claimed  from  Washington  to 
Fairfax,  a  distance  of  23  miles.  In  connection  therewith 
the  company  claimed  what  they  said  to  be  a  necessary 
unauthorized  movement  of  that  3-foot  unit  of  space  over 
the  remainder  of  the  train  run  of  215  miles,  notwithstanding 
the  fact  that  there  was  from  20  to  48  feet  of  unoccupied 
space  every  day. 

On  April  7  the  emergency  was  for  33  miles,  and  the  un- 
authorized claim  in  connection  therewith  covered  a  distance 
of  205  miles. 

On  April  18  the  emergency  service  was  performed  for  a 
distance  of  37  miles,  and  the  unauthorized  movement 
claimed  for  201  miles. 

Tlie  average  haul  of  all  the  emergency  units  claimed  on 
this  train  during  the  test  period  was  59  miles. 

Question  (by  Mr.  Stewart).  What  is  the  total  length  of 
the  run? 

Answer.  Two  hundred  and  thirty-eight  miles. 

Question  (by  Mr.  Wood).  What  was  the  unoccupied 
space  out  of  Washington  on  that  train  ? 

Answer.  I  assume  that  it  was  as  stated,  from  20  to  48 
feet. 

Question,  Well,  does  the  report  show  where  that  unoccu- 
pied space  was,  whether  it  was  from  Washington,  whether 
it  was  out  of  Washington,  or  whether  it  was  farther  along 
on  the  line? 

Answer.  It  was  over  the  train  run,  except  where  it  was 
reduced  by  these  emergency  claims. 

The  company  in  each  instance  has  made  claim  for  un- 
authorized space,  setting  forth  that  it  was  necessary  in 
every  case  to  reserve  and  set  apart  that  amount  of  space 
for  the  remainder  of  the  train  run.  In  view  of  the  fact 
that  during  the  entire  period  the  mixed  car  shows  from  20 
to  48  feet  of  unoccupied  space,  and  that  the  emergency 
unit  carried  only  served  to  utilize  part  of  the  otherwise 
unremunerative  space,  it  is  difficult  to  justify  these  claims 
for  unauthorized  space  in  train  9,  and  still  more  so  to  find 
any  sort  of  a  reasonable  explanation  why  26  return  move- 


335 

ments  of  this  emergency  space  should  have  been  claimed 
in  train  No.  10. 

This  latter  claim  is  for  3  feet  26  trips,  238  miles,  and 
results  in  a  charge  of  18,564  car-foot  miles,  which,  together 
with  those  made  in  train  No.  9,  make  an  aggregate  of  31,368 
car-foot  miles  of  unauthorized  service  claimed  in  connec- 
tion with  emergency  service,  which  amounted  to  only  5,760 
car-foot  miles.  The  report  for  this  route  alone  shows  17 
claims  for  unauthorized  movement  of  the  character  de- 
scribed. 

Question  (by  Mr.  Stewart).  So  they  treated  the  emer- 
gency service  in  the  same  manner  as  the  regular  service? 
(R.  3866-387H.) 

Alabama   Great   Southern   Railway: 

Answer.  I  have  some  other  cases,  Mr.  Stewart.  On  the 
Alabama  Great  Southern,  trains  11  and  12,  emergency 
sei'vice  authorized  and  paid  for  in  train  11,  amounting  to 
5,395  car-foot  miles.  Unauthorized  space  claimed  in  con- 
nection therewith,  3,537  car-foot  miles  in  train  11,  and 
8,008  car-foot  miles  in  train  12,  the  return,  or  a  ratio  of 
2.1  to  1. 

Another  case  on  the  same  road,  route  124522,  the  same 
trains,  only  reversed.  In  train  12,  the  emergency  space 
was  authorized  and  amounted  to  2,514  car-foot  miles,  and 
the  unauthorized  space  claimed  in  train  12  equaled  3,492 
car-foot  miles,  the  return  in  this  case  being  claimed  in  train 
11,  and  amounted  to  5,082  car-foot  miles,  or  a  total  of 
8,574  car-foot  miles  as  against  2,514  car-foot  miles  author- 
ized, or  a  ratio  of  3.4  to  1.     (R.  387H,  3872.) 

Denver  &  Rio  Grande  Railroad: 

On  the  Denver  &  Rio  Grande,  route  165502,  trains  472 
and  471,  465  car-foot  miles  of  emergency  paid  for  in  train 
472;  unauthorized  space  claimed  in  connection  therewith, 
4,035  car-foot  miles,  and  in  471,  the  return,  4,500  car-foot 
miles,  or  a  total  of  8,500  car-foot  miles  unauthorized,  com- 
pared with  465  car-foot  miles  authorized,  or  a  ratio  of  18.4 
to  1. 

Question.  Where  you  speak  of  the  return  charge,  there 
was  no  authorization  ? 

Answer.  No  authorization  on  the  return.  On  the  same 
road,  route  169507,  trains  5  and  4.  Train  5  had  authorized 
emergency  space  paid  for  to  the  amount  of  1,893  car-foot 
miles.  Unauthorized  space  claimed  in  connection  there- 
with in  that  train  amounted  to  6,099  car-foot  miles. 
Unauthorized  space  claimed  in  train  4,  as  a  return  of  that 
space,  amounted  to  6,993  car-foot  iniles,  or  a  total  of  13,092 
car-foot  miles  unauthorized  as  against  1,893  car-foot  miles 
authorized,  or  a  ratio  of  6.9  to  1.     (R.  3872.) 


330 

And  additional  cases: 

St.  Louis  &  San  Francisco,  route  145524,  trains  29  and 
30,  756  car-foot  miles  of  emergency  space  paid  for;  3,024 
car-foot  miles  unauthorized  space  claimed  in  train  29  and 
5,355  car-foot  miles  in  train  20,  the  return  movement, 
making  a  total  of  8,379  car-foot  miles  unauthorized  as 
against  756  car-foot  miles  authorized,  or  a  ratio  of  11  to  1. 

Southern  llailwa}-,  route  121539,  train  18,  1,848  car-foot 
miles  authorized  and  paid  for;  claimed  in  connection  there- 
with, 3,927  car-foot  miles  hi  train  18  and  5,775  car-foot 
miles  in  train  17,  the  return  train,  or  a  ratio  of  5.3  to  1. 
***** 

Wabash  Railway,  route  135541,  train  4,  emergency  space 
paid  for,  198  car-foot  miles;  unauthorized  space  claimed 
m  connection  therewith,  1,062  car-foot  miles;  ratio  of 
unauthorized  to  authorized  space,  5.4  to  1. 

Pennsylvania  Co.,  route  135551,  train  628,  emergency 
space  paid  for,  48  car-foot  miles;  unauthorized  space 
claimed  in  connection  therewith,  1,527  car-foot  miles; 
ratio  of  unauthorized  to  authorized  space,  31.8  to  1. 

Southern  Railway,  route  120517,  train  11,  emergency 
space  paid  for,  189  car-foot  miles,  unauthorized  space 
claimed  in  connection  therewith,  198  car-foot  miles  on 
train  11,  and  on  train  12,  the  return  movement,  387  car- 
foot  miles,  or  a  total  of  unauthorized  space  claimed  of  585 
car-foot  miles,  a  ratio  of  3.1  to  1. 

Boston  &  Albany,  route  104513,  trams  36-42  and  48-62, 
emergency  space  paid  for,  444  car-foot  miles;  unauthorized 
space  claimed  in  connection  therewith,  2,172  car-foot 
miles,  or  a  ratio  of  4.9  to  1. 

Southern  Railway,  route  127520,  trains  6  and  5,  emer- 
gency space  paid  for,  438  car-foot  miles ;  unauthorized  space 
claimed  in  connection  therewith,  on  trahi  6,  432  car-foot 
miles,  and  on  train  5,  the  return  movement,  870  car-foot 
miles,  makmg  a  total  of  1,302  car-foot  miles  unauthorized, 
or  a  ratio  of  3  to  1. 

Cincinnati,  New  Orleans  &  Texas  Pacific,  route  129509, 
trams  3  and  4,  emergency  space  paid  for,  3,340  car-foot 
miles;  unautliorized  space  claimed  in  connection  therewith, 
4,096  on  tram  3,  and  on  tram  4,  the  return  movement, 
7,436  car-foot  miles,  or  a  total  of  11,532  car-foot  miles, 
l)eing  a  ratio  of  3.5  to  1. 

Cincinnati,  New  Orleans  &  Texas  Pacific,  route  129509 
again,  trains  5  and  2,  emergency  space  paid  for,  246  car- 
foot  miles;  unauthorized  space  claimed  in  connection  there- 
Avith,  768  car-foot  miles  on  train  5,  and  on  train  2,  the  re- 


337 

turn  movement,  1,01  i  car-foot  miles,  making  a  total  of 
1,782  car-foot  miles  imanthorized,  or  a  ratio  of  7  to  1. 
Pittsburgh,  Cincinnati,  Chicago  &  St.  Louis,  route 
133538,  train  807,  emergency  space  paid  for,  150  car-foot 
miles;  unauthorized  space  claimed  in  connection  there- 
with, 1,134  car-foot  miles,  or  a  ratio  of  7.6  to  1.  (R.  3873- 
3875.) 

CASES  CITED  IN  TESTIMONY  TYPICAL  OF  MANNER  IN 
WHICH  THE  RAILROADS  REPORTED  AND  CLAIMED 
SPACE  THROUGHOUT  THEIR  REPORTS. 

Mr.  McBride  testified  on  cross-examination  as  follows: 
Question  (by  Mr.  Stewart).  Is  it  not  a  fact,  Mr.  Mc- 
Bride, that,  aside  from  the  cases  where  the  instructions 
might  have  been  stretched,  the  cases  you  have  cited  are 
typical  of  the  manner  in  which  the  railroads  have  reported 
and  claimed  space  throughout  their  reports. 

Answer.  I  think  so,  yes,  sir.  Whenever  such  conditions 
obtain  the  space  was,  as  a  rule,  reported  in  that  way,  (R. 
3911.) 

TOTAL  OF  UNAUTHORIZED  SPACE  CLAIMS  CLASSIFIED 
AS  "H." 

Mr.  McBride  testified  on  direct  examination  as  follows: 

Before  leaving  that  I  would  like  to  again  call  attention 
to  the  fact  that  movements  that  I  have  described  will  be 
under  the  classification  "H"  on  Exhibit  48,  and  amount 
to  1,500,000  car-foot  miles,  all  of  which  was  included  in 
the  basis  for  the  apportionment  of  the  unoccupied  space; 
that  is,  included  in  the  mail  space  as  a  total. 

Question  (by  Mr.  Wood).  Total  of  what? 

Answer.  Total  of  the  emergency  claims  that  I  have  been 
testifying  about. 

Question.  Total  of  emergency  claims  was  how  much? 

Answer.  I  can  tell  you  exactly. 

Question.  Do  you  mean  authorized  or  unauthorized  ? 

Answer.  Unauthorized,  shown  as  "H"  on  Exhibit  48. 
It  is  1,624,158. 

Question.  And  you  thmk  that  these  cases  that  you  have 
given  are  illustrative  of  the  ratio  of  the  unauthorized  to 
the  authorized  in  emergency  service  ? 

Answer.  I  would  not  say  so.  Not  m  all  cases.  They  are 
in  the  cases  that  I  have  stated.     (R.  3875.) 

122698—19 22 


338 

CASES  CITED  ILLUSTRATIVE  OF  SPACE  CLASSIFIED 
AS  "H." 

Question  (l)y  i\[r.  Wood).  This  3  to  1,7  to  1,  and  10 
to  1 — you  tliink  that  those  cases  are  illustrative  of  the 
unauthorized  to  the  authorized? 

Ans^ver.  Thev  are  illustrative,  I  think,  of  the  cases  where 
we  classify  it  as  ''H."      (R.  3876.) 

(B)  NO  WARRANT  FOR  CHARGING  UNUSED  OR  RETURN 
EMPTY  SPACE  IN  CONNECTION  WITH  EMERGENCY 
AUTHORIZATIONS. 

Mr.  McBride  testified  on  cross-examination  as  follows: 

Question  (by  Mr.  Wood).  Now,  then,  Mr.  McBride,  with 
reference  to  the  emergency  space.  I  don't  think  that  I 
quite  understood  your  criticism  of  the  use  of  emergency 
space.     What  was  it  ? 

i^jiswer.  You  mean  unauthorized  space  claimed  in  con- 
nection with  emergency  space  ? 

Question.  Yes. 

Answer.  Well,  my  point  there  is  that  it  can  not  be  argued 
by  the  railroads,  even  on  their  own  theory,  that  they  are 
required  to  reserve  any  space  for  emergency  units,  because 
they  are  only  carried  when  the  consist  of  tlie  train  will 
permit.  It  seemed  to  me,  therefore,  that  there  was  very 
little  warrant,  in  fact  none  at  all,  for  charging  that  space 
over  any  part  of  the  run  w^here  no  mails  were  carried,  and 
even  less  for  the  claiming  of  return  space  in  connection 
therewith.     *     *     *     (R.  3933.) 

THE   RAILROADS'    APPORTIONMENT   OF   THE    UNOCCU- 
PIED SPACE  IN  MIXED  CARS. 

(A)  THE  RAILROADS  APPORTIONED  UNOCCUPIED  SPACE 
IN  ALL  MIXED  CARS  TO  THE  MAILS  ON  THE  BASIS 
OF  THE  PER  CENT  REPRESENTING  AUTHORIZED 
SPACE  PLUS  ALL  UNAUTHORIZED  AND  EXCESS 
SPACE  CLAIMED  IN  CONNECTION  THEREWITH. 

Mr.  Wettling  testified  on  cross-examination  as  follows: 

Question  (by  Mr.  Stewart)  .  Then  your  apportionment 
to  the  mails  of  the  car-foot  miles,  of  the  part  of  the 
593,062,084  car-foot  miles,  is  made  not  only  on  the  basis 
of  the  authorized  space,  but  the  authorized  space,  this 
direct  assignment  of  the  excess  over  authorization,  unau- 
thorized, and  so  forth  ? 

Answer.  No,  sir,  no  excess  over  authorized  in  there. 
This  assignment  is  made  only  on  the  basis  of  the  use  of 
the  mixed  cars.     It  excludes  entirely  any  full  cars  or  any 


039 

parts  of  mail  service  expressed  in  apartment  cars.  The 
assignment  on  the  basis  of  the  total  of  the  mixed  cars 
only.  None  of  the  full  cars  participate  in  the  assignment 
in  that  case  at  all.  As  you  were  about  to  say,  however — 
eliminating  the  full  cars  and  apartments— that  is  then 
distributed  on  the  basis  of  both  the  authorized  and  the 
unauthorized  in  the  mixed  cars  as  to  the  small  storage 
and  the  closed-pouch  units.  The  total  percentages  are 
shown  for  each  class  of  service  in  column  14.  (R.  II.  Ex- 
hibit 6.) 

Question.  Can  you  state  whether  your  item  593,062,084 
car-foot  miles  in  column  15  represents  unoccupied  space 
in  mixed  cars  in  which  mails  were  carried  ? 

Answer.  It  represents  unoccupied  space  in  all  mixed 
cars,  some  of  which  did  not  carry  mail. 

***** 

Question.  Now,  coming  back  to  this  mixed  car  propo- 
sition, it  then  appears  that  your  593,062,084  car-foot 
miles  included  space  in  mixed  cars  in  which  no  mails 
whatever  were  carried  or  no  mails  were  authorized  to  be 
carried. 

Answer.  Yes,  sir. 
***** 

Question.  Now,  do  you  know  the  extent  of  that? 

Answer.  No,  sir. 

Question.  Have  you  any  idea  whether  or  not  it  equals, 
exceeds,  or  is  less  than  the  221,324,930  car-foot  miles 
included  in  this  593,062,084  of  yours? 

***** 

Question.  It  is  35  days  for  the  140  roads  of  the  first 
class.  Now  six-sevenths  of  that  would  be  190,973,691 
car-foot  miles,  and  I  am  asking  you  whether  you  have  any 
view  as  to  whether  the  amount  is  equal  to  that  or  more  or 
less? 

Answer.  Well,  if  I  were  asked,  as  I  think  I  am,  to  guess 
at  the  matter,  I  would  sav  that  it  would  be  less;  but  it 
might  be  as  much  as  190,000,000  out  of  the  593,000,000, 
so  that  12^  per  cent  of  that  would  be  an  excessive  charge 
to  the  mail,  if  your  interpretation  is  right  rather  than  ours. 
We,  however,  think  that  we  have  only  charged  what  was 
reasonably  fair,  on  the  general  average. 

Question.  Then,  Mr.  Wettling,  you  would  not  have 
your  12.44  per  cent  remaining?  It  would  change  that 
per  cent,  of  course  ? 

Answer.  Yes.  I  beg  your  pardon.  It  would.  I  was 
not  thinking  far  enough  ahead,  on  that.  It  might  reduce 
that  down  to  as  much  as  10,  possiblv.  I  don't  think  it 
could  be  that  far.     (R.  1293,  1294,  1298,  1299,  1300.) 


340 

(B)  RATIO  OF  TJNOCCUPIED  SPACE  CHARGED  TO  MAILS 
OBTAINED  BY  INCLUDING  WITH  THE  AUTHOR- 
IZED SPACE  ALL  THE  EXCESS  AND  UNAUTHORIZED 
SPACE   REPORTED. 

Mr.  Fairfield  testified  on  cross-examination  as  follows: 

Question  by  (Mr.  Stewart).  You  spoke  of  there  being 
a  very  small  part  of  your  car-miles  represented  by  trains 
on  which  no  mails  were  carried? 

Answer.  Practically  none;  yes,  sir. 

Question.  But  you  referred  only  to  the  one  line,  did 
you  not,  one  system  ? 

Answer.  Well,  the  entire  system. 

Question.  All  the  roads  that  you  have  mentioned  in 
vour  testimony? 

Answer.  Well,  I  am  speaking  there  about  the  Illinois 
Central  and  the  Central  of  Georgia  systems. 

Question.  Then,  of  course  that  is  confined  only  to  those 
systems  and  not  to  those  other  systems  which  are  repre- 
sented on  your  diagrams  here  and  about  which  you  have 
given  testimony? 

Answer.  On  that  particular  point  I  have  no  direct 
knowledge  on  the  other  roads. 

Question.  In  so  far  as  that  space  did  exist  in  your  opera- 
tion, in  this  statistical  period,  you  charged  to  the  mails  a 
proportion  of  that,  did  you  not? 

Answer.  In  so  far  as  it  existed,  I  think,  in  April.  I 
tried  to  think  last  night  of  any  trains  operated  in  April  on 
which  we  had  no  mad  service.  I  can  think  of  none  at  all 
on  our  lines;  the  service  is  so  very  frecjuent,  and  we  have 
mail  service  of  some  kind  on  practically  every  train — 
every  train,  so  far  as  I  can  think. 

Question.  However,  if  they  were  there  they  were  treated 
that  way  ? 

Answer.  They  were;  yes,  sir. 

Question.  This  unused  space  was  not  only  charged  to 
the  mails  in  certain  ratio,  but  that  ratio  itself  obtained  by 
taking  the  authorized  space  and  adding  to  it  all  of  this 
other  excess  and  unauthorized  space,  was  it  not  ? 

Answer.  Yes,  sir.     (R.  2336,  2337.) 

(C)  FURTHER   DISCUSSION    OF  THE    QUESTION    OF    THE 

TREATMENT  OF  UNOCCUPIED  SPACE  IN  MIXED  CARS 

BY     MR.     WOOD,     MR.      STEWART,     AND     ATTORNEY 

EXAMINER  BROWN. 

Mr.  Wood.  Mr.    Stewart,    you    don't   mean    that    they 

added  in  the  unauthorized  space  in  apartment  cars  and 

railway  post-office   cars    and   full   cars;     you   mean   that 


341 

when  jackpotted,  all  of  the  authorized  and  unauthorized 
space  in  the  mixed  cars  ? 

Mr.  Stewart.  Yes,  that  is  what  you  divided. 

Mr.  Wood.  No;  that  is  also  the  factor  used  in  making 
the  apportionment. 

Attorney  Examiner  Brown.  Well,  you  did  do  this, 
which  was  brought  out  by  Mr.  Bradley.  You  took  every 
passenger  train  you  run  and  apportioned  9  per  cent,  or 
about  that,  as  I  remember  it — or  some  percentage — ratio 
to  the  mails  for  every  passenger  train,  whether  you  carried 
any  mails  or  not  ? 

Mr.  Wood.  I  don't  know  what  the  per  cent  is,  but  what 
was  done,  Mr.  Examiner,  as  I  understand  it,  *  *  * 
was  this,  that  the  mixed  cars  were  all  treated  as  a 
imit;  that  the  space  m  the  mixed  cars  was  treated 
without  relation  to  the  space  m  the  full  railway  post 
office  or  apartment,  or  the  full  storage;  and  that  in  the 
mixed  cars  they  first  charged  directly  to  the  passenger 
that  which  was  ref)resented  by  the  occupied  baggage 
space,  ascertained  in  the  manner  in  which  the  wit- 
nesses have  described,  which  apparently  at  some  time 
was  ascertained  on  an  average  basis  and  sometimes  on  a 
yearly  basis,  according  to  the  man  who  did  it.  They  did 
the  same  thing  with  the  express  space.  Then  they  charged 
to  the  mails  the  maximum  mail  authorizations  in  the  man- 
ner that  has  been  described  here,  with  the  return  move- 
ment, thereby  gettmg  three  classes,  and  that  all  of  the 
unoccupied  space  iii  these  mixed  cars  was  then  classified 
together  as  a  fourth  class  and  divided  among  the  other 
three  m  the  proportion  which  each  of  the  other  three  was 
to  the  total  of  the  other  three,  but  that  that  related  only 
to  the  distribution  of  the  unoccupied  space  in  the  mixed 
cars— and  by  the  mixed-car  definition  the  niLxed  car  must 
be  included,  not  simply  the  full  car  which  carries  a  mixed 
load,  but  the  baggage  end  of  an  apartment  car  which 
carries  a  mixed  load. 

Attorney  Examiner  Brown.  Well,  in  that  you,  by 
using  your  percentage  relation  between  the  three,  did 
charge  to  the  mails  the  proportion  of  the  space  for  the 
conduct  of  the  passenger  train  where  there  never  had  been 
and  never  will  be  any  mail  carried  in  it. 

Mr.  Wood.  ^Vnd  we  also  charged  to  the  baggage  its  pro- 
portion of  the  unoccupied  space  in  cars  that  carried  no 
baggage,  but  only  mail  and  express,  and  we  charged  to  the 
express  a  portion  of  the  unoccupied  space  in  cars  that 
carried  no  express  but  only  mail  or  baggage;  but  where  the 
car  carried  only  one  kind  of  trafhc,  then  that  entire  car  or 
part  of  car  was  charged 


342 

Attorney  Examiner  Brown.  Well,  I  think  perhaps  it 
would  be  well  to  have  that  explained. 

Mr.  Wood.  Mr.  Wettling  expects  to  go  into  that  thor- 
oughly;  but  whether  the  reasons  for  it  were  good  or  bad, 
I  understand  that  to  be  the  way  that  it  was  done,  unless 
there  might  have  been  possibly  some  individual  case  in 
which  some  mdividual  line  might  have  followed  it  through 
car  by  car.     That  I  don't  know, 

Attorney  Examiner  Brown.  And  it  is  for  the  com- 
mission to  determme,  when  it  has  the  matter  before  it, 
whether  the  system  used  overweighted  the  mails  or  not. 

^h:  Wood.  Exactly,  su-.  Now,  I  think  that  what 
I  have  stated,  Mr.  McBride,  is  a  correct  statement  of  the 
general  process  employed. 

Mi\  McBride.  I  think  m  a  general  way,  yes,  except, 
of  course,  in  the  expjress  service  and  baggage  service,  thev 
were  not  charged  with  any  return  space,  as  you  did  with 
the  mail. 

Mr.  Wood.  I  understand  that.  In  other  words,  I  did 
not  undertake  to  say  how  the  direct  charge  was  determined. 
That  is  already  fully  covered  hj  the  record.  The  exam- 
iner's question  relates  to  the  distribution  of  the  unoccupied, 
as  I  understood  it.     (JR.  2337-2340.) 

(D)  UNOCCUPIED    SPACE    IN    MIXED  CARS  DIVIDED   ON 
BASIS  OF  LOADED  SPACE  IN  EACH  OF  THE  SERVICES. 

Mr.  Bradley  testified  on  direct  examination  as  follows: 

Question  (by  Attorney  Examiner  Brown).  That  would 
be  unauthorized  space  ? 

Answer.  Yes,  sir. 

Question.  Now,  if  that  car  runs  from  D  back  to  A,  and 
no  mail  is  carried  in  it  at  all,  you  still  charge  that  15  feet  to 
the  mail  ? 

Answer.  Yes. 

Question.  That  is  unoccupied  space? 

Answer.  Yes. 

Question.  But  you  do  not  charge  in  any  case  to  the  mails 
more  space  than  is  authorized,  either  thi'ough  or  on  the 
return  ? 

Answer.  If  I  understand  your  question,  the  way  the 
statistics  were  prepared,  we  charged  in  the  baggage  car  to 
the  mail  service  the  space  that  was  authorized,  and  so  re- 
ported that  as  the  authorized  space.  Now,  in  addition  to 
that,  following  the  principle  that  the  experimental  space- 
basis  law  provided,  m  regard  to  the  accountability  of  the 
traffic  for  the  round-trip  movement,  provision  was  made 
to  charge  the  mail  with  the  complementary  return  space 
associated  with  the  outgoing  loaded  trip. 


343 

Question.  The  outgoing  maximum  ? 

Answer.  Yes,  sir. 

Question.  I  think  I  understand  it.  That  is,  it  was  not 
divided  between  the  express,  the  baggage,  and  the  mail  on 
any  percentage  ? 

Answer.  Why,  no.  It  was  charged  according  to  the 
amount  of  loaded  space  in  each  of  those  services,  the  in- 
struction to  the  baggagemaster  being  to  report  the  maxi- 
mum amount  of  space  of  anv  of  those  traffics  in  either 
direction.     (R.  2208,  2209.) 

(E)  APPORTIONMENT  OF  UNOCCUPIED  SPACE  IN  MIXED 
CAR  MADE  UPON  AGGREGATE  OF  ALL  TRAIN  ITEMS 
INVOLVED  WHETHER  MAILS  WERE  CARRIED  IN  THE 
PARTICULAR  CARS  OR  NOT. 

Mr.  Bradley  testified  on  cross-examination  as  follows: 

Question  (by  Mr.  Stewart).  *  *  *  Now,  referring  to 
your  statements  regarding  the  apportionment  of  the  unoccu- 
pied space,  and  in  that  respect  I  shall  not  go  over  all  of  your 
items  to  analyze  them,  because  it  would  be  impossible  from 
memory,  or  from  the  few  notes  that  I  have  jotted  down. 
I  will  ask  you  particularly  about  your  apportionment  of 
the  unoccupied  space  in  the  mixed  cars,  whether  or  not  it 
is  true  that  in  your  apportionment  you  charge  to  the  mails 
a  part  of  all  the  unoccupied  space  in  mixed  baggage  cars, 
whether  the  mails  were  carried  in  those  cars  or  not  at  any 
time  ? 

Answer.  My  understanding  is  that  the  charge  to  the  mail 
service  was  made  upon  the  aggregate  of  all  the  train  items  in- 
volved in  the  inquiry,  without  particular  reference  to 
whether  the  mail  service  was  exactly  represented  in  every 
one  of  those  baggage  and  mail  apartment  cars;  in  other 
words,  that  it  was  a  general  approximation  believed  to  be 
on  a  fair  basis. 

Question  (by  Attorney  Examiner  Brown).  That  is  to 
say,  if  you  had  an  authorization  for  Monday  and  Tuesday 
over  a  given  line,  or  Saturday  and  Sunday  over  a  given 
line,  you  would  charge  it  to  space  the  balance  of  the  week  ? 

Answer.  Yes,  sir. 

Mr.  Stewart.  That  is  not  the  case  I  refer  to,  Mr.  Exam- 
iner. That  would  be  conclusive  as,  perhaps,  unused,  but 
this  space  is  unoccupied;  there  never  was  any  mail  au- 
thorized in  that  particular  car,  and  yet  in  all  of  these  cars, 
whether  mails  are  ever  carried  in  tfiem  at  any  time,  the 
unused  space  was  apportioned  between  the  passenger,  the 
express,  and  the  mails,  although  the  mails  never  partici- 
pated in  the  space  at  all. 


344 

Attorney  Examiner  Brown.  Give  me  an  instance  of 
that.  How  could  that  happen,  if  you  never  had  an  au- 
thorization ? 

The  Witness.  How  could  that  be,  Mr.  Stewart  ?  While 
I  have  said  that,  so  far  as  the  Pennsylvania  hues  East  are 
concerned,  about  50  per  cent  of  the  passenger  trains  are 
authorized  to  carry  mail,  the  other  trains  are  in  the  attitude 
of  readiness  to  carry  it  whenever  it  is  presented.  The  de- 
partment requires  a  train  to  carry  mail  in  case  it  arrives 
Irom  another  road  and  misses  its  connection.  The  depart- 
ment makes  its  authorizations  with  practically  no  notice. 
We  have  to  be  instantly  ready  to  comply.  Why  is  there  not 
an  obligation  on  the  part  of  the  department  to  accept  the 
responsibility  for  that  space,  as  well  as  for  the  space  that 
they  directly  occupy  on  a  particular  trip  ? 

Question  (by  Attorney  Examiner  Brown).  Now,  if  the 
authorization  is  over  a  certain  train  between  two  points, 
and  you  run  five  other  trains  between  those  two  points,  do 
you  mean  to  say  that  you  charge  up  to  the  mails  the  space 
that  is  authorized  in  one  train  and  against  the  operation  of 
five  other  trains  ? 

Answer.  That  would  be  a  logical  extreme  of  the  state- 
ment, but,  you  see,  you  have  unwittingly  used  the  propor- 
tion 1  to  5,  when  I  have  already  stated  that  50  per  cent  of 
our  trains  do  carry  mail.  So  the  application  would  be  1 
to  2. 

Question.  Take  the  case  you  cited,  where  you  run,  I 
believe  j^ou  said,  four  or  five  trains,  between  a  main  line 
point  and  a  branch  point,  and  that  one  of  those  trains 
carried  all  the  mail. 

Answer.  That  case  was  a  mail  apartment.  The  mail 
apartment  is  a  fixed  part  of  that  combination  car.  The 
combination  car  was  obliged  to  make  this  trip  back  and 
forth  on  all  the  trains  that  were  run  on  that  branch  in  order 
to  perform  the  joint  service,  the  mail  service  and  the  bag- 
gage service,  but  the  mail  was  authorized  for  one  or  two  or 
three  trips,  as  the  case  may  be.  It  had  to  be  carried  over 
the  line,  or  else  the  company  would  have  been  obliged  to 
have  unlimited  equipment,  independent  of  these  specially 
constructed  mail  cars. 

Mr.  Stewart.  That  is  not  the  class  of  cases  that  I  am 
calling  attention  to. 

The  Witness.  I  was  replying  to  the  examiner's  question. 

Mr.  Stewart.  Yes.  llie  case  1  am  calling  your  atten- 
tion to  is  in  this  class  where  no  mails  were  ever  authorized 
in  a  car  at  all. 

The  Witness.  The  purpose  of  the  inquiry,  as  I  under- 
stood it,  was  to  take  the  composite  passenger  train,  repre- 


345 

senting,  for  the  month  of  April  or  for  the  statistical  period, 
all  of  the  activities — passenger,  miscellaneous,  baggage,  ex- 
press, and  mail.  Now,  as  a  whole,  we  view  the  participa- 
tion of  each  of  those  services  as  measured  by  tlie  space, 
there  having  been  an  agreement  that  space  would  bo 
utilized  as  the  yardstick  for  measuring  the  responsibility. 
Summing  up,  then,  the  general  participation  in  each  service 
in  the  composite  train,  we  make  a  single  charge  to  the  mail 
in  accordance  with  this  loaded  space  and  this  return  com- 
plementary' space  as  a  recognized  principle  in  the  space 
basis  law. 

Question  (by  Mr.  Stewart).  In  other  words,  you,  in 
your  charging  of  the  space,  assume  to  make  the  Post  Office 
Department  a  full  partner  with  the  railroad  company  in 
the  transaction  of  its  entire  business  and  the  operation  of 
everj'  car  in  every  train  on  the  road  ? 

Answer.  I  tliink  not,  Mr.  Stewart,  no  more  than  we  make 
the  passenger  or  the  express  a  full  partner,  but  we  treat 
all  of  the  shippers,  all  of  the  users  of  the  railroad  facilities, 
on  a  common  basis. 

Question  (by  Attorney  Examiner  Brown).  Well,  is  not 
your  mail  carriage  on  a  different  basis  than  your  baggage 
and  express  ?  You  stated  it  is  a  different  kind  of  transpor- 
tation. It  is  not  connected  with  passenger  in  any  way; 
it  is  not  connected  with  an  independent  sliipper  in  any 
way? 

Answer.  A  very  marked  difference. 

Question.  Now,  that  difference  is  not  sufficient  to  dis- 
tinguish it  from  a  division  of  baggage  or  express.  Now, 
you  must  go  back,  must  you  not,  to  your  authorizations? 
Assuming,  now,  without  at  all  deciding  it,  that  you  were 
entitled  upon  the  train  that  carried  that  mail  to  the  maxi- 
mum from  the  point  of  origin  to  destination,  and  the  return 
thereon,  is  there  any  reason  that  you  can  tliink  of  that 
would  justify  your  charging  up  to  the  mails  space  in  a  train 
in  wliich  mails  were  never  carried  ? 

Answer.  I  think,  Mr.  Examiner,  that  there  is  a  very  good 
and  a  very  obvious  reason.  In  the  first  place,  our  com- 
posite unit  is  the  passenger  train,  composed  of  these  differ- 
ent elements.  Now,  if  we  do  not  charge  up  to  each  of  those 
elements  the  particular  space  that  each  is  responsible  for, 
directly  and  indirectly,  it  throws  the  burden  on  one  of  the 
other  services,  which  would  be  unjust. 

Question.  Yes;  but  neither  directly  nor  indirectly  is  this 
space  that  you  charge  up  to  the  train  that  never  carried  the 
mail  responsible  at  all  for  the  movement  of  that  train. 

Answer.  I  can  say  this:  If  this  case  were  concerned  with 
the  propriety  of  a  rate  made  by  the  carrier,  and  presup- 


34G 

posed  to  inchule  all  of  the  ancillary  influences  and  credits 
and  debits  that  should  ^o  with  it,  there  would  be  a  difl'crent 
situation  from  that  which  presents  itself  when  the  mail 
service  is  being  paid  for  on  the  space  basis.  We  have 
direct  regard  for  tonnage,  the  quantity  of  traffic  carried, 
and  then  enters  an  inquir}-  which  seeks  to  establish  the 
responsibility  for  the  various  portions  of  that  service  in 
accordance  wnth  the  space  which  the  Post  Office  Depart- 
ment and  the  experimental  space  law  accept  as  the  measure 
of  their  participation. 

Question.  Let  me  cite  you  a  case.  Your  railroad  runs 
through  from  New  York  to  Chicago.  A  fast  train,  on 
which,  by  the  way,  jou  charge  an  extra  fare,  although  I 
think  you  have  run  some  of  those  cars  on  trains  on  which 
you  do  not  charge  an  extra  fare;  you  run  one  from  Wash- 
ington, for  instance,  where  the  Washington  passenger  can 
get  the  benefit  of  your  buffet  car  and  your  library  and  all 
that.  That  is  carried  on  that  particular  train.  Now,  that 
car  does  not  earn  anything.  It  is  a  mere  added  advantage 
to  the  traveler.  It  induces  him  to  go  by  your  road,  per- 
haps, in  contradistinction  to  going  by  some  other  railroad 
to  the  same  destination  point.  Would  you,  on  that  theory, 
have  a  right  to  charge  up  the  expense  oi  the  movement  of  a 
car  similar  to  that  to  every  tram  you  ran  from  New  York 
to  Chicago,  or  Philadelphia,  or  Pittsburgh  ? 

Answer,  No.  No;  1  do  not  see  that  the  cases  are  on  all 
fours. 

Question.  It  seems  to  me  they  are  undoubtedly  so. 
Here  the  department  gets  connection  with  you  when  it 
authorizes  you  or  requires  you  to  carry  certain  mails  in  a 
certain  train.  Now,  when  you  do  that,  how  can  you 
charge  up  the  same  space  in  a  train  in  wliich  the  depart- 
ment has  never  asked  you  to  carry  the  mail,  and  does  not 
want  you  to  carry  it? 

Answer.  It  seems  to  me  that  an  analogous  case  mi^ht 
be  if  a  passenger  should  come  and  say,  "I  am  going  to  ride 
with  you  on  certain  days,  and  I  would  like  to  reserve  space 
on  other  days,  but  I  am  not  going  to  pay  you  for  the  days 
that  I  reserve  it  on." 

Question  (by  Mr.  Stewart).  But  your  analogy  would 
consist  of  50  per  cent  of  your  trains  in  which  you  said  no 
mail  was  ever  carried. 

Answer.  In  the  general  requirement  in  the  space  law  or 
in  the  new  law,  which  obliges  a  railroad  company  to  per- 
form a  service  in  accordance  with  the  conditions  fixed  by 
the  Postmaster  General,  and  when  the  department  makes 
authorizations  of  such  extreme  variety  that  it  is  obvious 
that  the  carrier  has  to  be  ready  under  any  conditions,  and 


347 

at  any  time,  to  meet  their  wishes,  the  department  can 
enforce  that  by  the  power  which  it  has  to  impose  fines  for 
delinquencies. 

Question.  Did  that  apprehension  in  j^our  mind  ever 
cause  the  railroad  company  to  run  1  foot  of  car  space  in 
any  train  that  it  would  not  have  run  otherwise? 

Answer.  Well,  it  is  hard  to  tell  how  far  these  motives, 
consciously  or  unconsciously,  affect  operating  officials,  Mr. 
Stewart.  I  would  rather  not  go  into  the  psychological 
field. 

Question.  But  that  is  the  only  reason,  really,  that  the 
railroads  can  give  for  charging  that  against  the  mail;  is 
not  that  correct? 

Answer.  No;  I  think  not.  I  think  the  general  justice  of 
it  applies,  when  you  are  studying  the  entire  passenger 
train  service.  We  would  not  be  justified  in  charging  that 
to  some  other.     (R.  2233-2240.) 

IN  GENERAL. 

(A^  WHILE  THE  PURPOSE  OF  THE  INQUIRY  WAS  TO  DE- 
TERMINE RATES  FOR  THE  UNITS  OF  SPACE  DESIG- 
NATED IN  THE  STATUTE.  THE  RAILROADS  PRO- 
CEEDED ON  THE  THEORY  OF  CHARGING  TO  THE 
MAILS  ALL  SPACE  OPERATED  IN  CONNECTION  WITH 
EQUIPMENT  IN  THEIR  POSSESSION  AS  A  RESULT  OF 
CONDITIONS  UNDER  THE  WEIGHT  BASIS. 

Mr.  Wettling  testified  on  cross-examination  as  follows : 

Question  (by  Mr.  Stewart)  .  Now,  Mr.  Wettling,  what  did 
you  conceive  to  be  the  purpose  of  this  statistical  inquiry 
with  reference  to  this  question  of  compensation  for  a  60- 
foot  storage  car  unit  ? 

Answer.  To  determine  the  amount  of  space  that  was 
necessarily  operated  by  the  railroad  company  in  compliance 
with  the  requirements  and  demands  of  the  Post  Office 
Department  as  to  the  space.  And  as  to  the  other  matter, 
the  determination  generally  should  not  apply  to  any 
particular  kind  of  car  or  any  particular  kind  of  railway 
post-office  or  other  mail  space  the  cost  of  operating  a  60- 
foot  unit  of  space:  that  is  to  say,  a  car  of  space. 

Question.  Exactly.  Now,  if  the  statute  fixed  the  maxi- 
mum size  of  this  unit  of  space  which  was  to  be  required  by 
the  Post  Office  Department  and  furnished  by  the  railroad 
company,  as  60  feet,  and  the  nurpose  of  the  inquiry  was  to 
ascertain  the  fair  and  reasonanle  value  of  service  rendered 
in  that  unit,  should  not  the  tabulation  of  these  statistics 
express,  with  respect  to  space  and  operation,  that  space  and 
operation  which  coin<.'ides  with  the  unit  authorized  by  the 
statute  and  not  in  excess  of  it? 


348 

Answer.  That  was  not.  our  interpretation,  Mr.  Stewart. 

Question.  Well,  don't  you  think  that  is  a  reasonable 
interpretation  ? 

Answer.  We  tabulated  that  exact  space,  and  in  addition 
thereto  any  such  space  as  we  figured  was  necessary  because 
of  the  conditions  of  operations,  because  of  the  conditions 
of  the  equipment  and  the  class  of  equipment  necessarily 
operated,  also  tabulated  that  space  in  addition  to  the  one 
that  you  mention.  We  do  not  restrict  it  entirely  to  the 
60  feet. 

Question.  But  if  the  60-foot  car  unit  is  to  be  a  permanent 
unit,  having  been  fixed  by  statute  in  the  beginning  and 
having  been  adopted  by  the  department  in  the  enforcement 
of  its  operations  under  that  statute,  and  we  having  come 
before  the  commission  for  the  purpose  of  having  them  fix 
a  fair  and  reasonable  rate  to  be  paid  to  the  companies  for 
the  operation  of  that  unit,  where  is  the  justification  in 
charging  to  the  department  any  greater  operation  than  a 
60-foot  oar  unit  in  ascertaining  that  fair  price  ? 

Answer.  I  thmk  that  I  will  leave  that  argument  for 
counsel  to  take  care  of.  It  seems  to  me  that  we  have  put 
up  our  statistics  on  the  basis  that  we  conceived  they 
should  be  put  up,  and  on  the  theory  that  we  were  charging 
for  the  operation  of  such  space  and  such  cars  as,  because  of 
our  inability  to  meet  certain  conditions  demanded  by  the 
Post  Office  Department,  it  was  necessary  for  us  to  make 
such  charges. 

Question.  Well,  then,  in  effect  the  position  of  the  rail- 
roads' action  on  these  statistics  is  this:  That  instead  of 
charging  to  the  mails  the  correct  space  and  operation  of 
that  space  whioh  corresponds  with  the  unit  of  service 
which  was  authorized  by  Congress  and  which  the  depart- 
ment is  using  and  asking  the  commission  to  make  a  rate  on, 
the  companies  have  charged  to  the  mails  not  only  that 
space  and  operation,  but  all  the  excess  space  found  to  have 
been  operated  by  the  companies  in  connection  with  that 
60-foot  unit  which  has  grown  out  of  a  condition  found  in 
the  nature  of  the  equipment  in  the  possession  of  the  com- 
panies and  the  manner  in  whioh  they  have  seen  fit  to 
construct  that  equipment  in  the  past.     Is  not  that  true  ? 

Answer.  That  necessarily  follows;  yes,  sir.  (R.  1238- 
1240.) 

Mr.  Wettling  testified  further  that  the  railroads  did 
not  make  any  effort  to  conform  cars  and  apartments  to  the 
sizes  prescribed,  because  it  was  not  definitely  determined 
by  the  statute  that  such  change  should  be  made  until 
after  the  test. 


Question  (by  Mr.  Stewart).  Mr.  Wettling,  do  you 
know  whether  the  railroad  companies  attempted  to  con- 
form their  equipment  to  these  units  of  space  authorized 
by  the  statute? 

Answer.  I  don't  think  that  they  did,  because  of  the  fact 
that  it  was  not  definitely  determined  by  the  statute  that 
the  equipment  should  be  so  conformed  until  after  a  test  had 
been  made,  then  it  might  be  required  of  them.  But  I 
don't  thmk  that  there  was  anything  in  the  statute  which 
required  of  the  carriers  to  conform  their  space  and  the 
partitioning  off  of  their  cars  to  the  units  recited  in  the 
statute,  in  any  event,  imtil  after  a  test  and  a  hearing 
and  a  decision  of  the  Interstate  Commerce  Commission 
had  been  rendered  with  regard  thereto.  It  was  not  prac- 
ticable to  make  such  a  change,  even  if  it  were  desirable, 
on  the  short  notice  that  was  had  between  the  time  of  the 
enactment  of  the  statute  and  the  time  of  the  installation 
of  the  service.     (R.  1241.) 

Question.  Now,  Mr.  Wettling,  I  don't  know  whether 
you  are  acquainted  with  the  fact  or  not,  but  I  will  ask 
you  whether  you  do  know  that,  followijig  the  time  the 
orders  were  issued  tor  placing  this  service  on  the  space 
basis  the  railwaj'  mail  pay  committee  representing  the 
railroads  in  this  case  issued  instructions  to  the  railroads 
to  not  change  their  equipment. 

Answer,  Now,  it  is  just  barely  possible  that  might  have 
happened,  but  I  don't  remember  any  such  occurrence  at 
any  conference  I  attended,  nor  I  did  not  see  a  circular  to 
that  effect. 

Question.  If  you  do  not  know,  of  course  I  won't  ask 
you  to  reply. 

Answer,  1  can  conceive  why  it  might  be  done. 

^Ir.  Stewart.  May  I  ask,  Mr.  Examiner,  that  this  letter 
of  the  Second  Assistant  Postmaster  General,  dated  Novem- 
ber 2,  1916,  on  that  subject,  be  received  in  evidence? 

Mr.  Wood.  May  I  see  it? 

Mr.  Stewart.  (Certainly  (handing  paper  to  Mr.  Wood). 

Mr.  Wood.   I  have  no  objection. 

Attorney  Examiner  Brown.  It  may  be  received  as 
Post  Office  Department  Exhibit  No.  71.     (R.  1246, 1247.) 


350 

(  B)  THERE  IS  SUBSTANTIAL  AGREEMENT  BETWEEN  THE 
CHARACTER  OF  THE  UNAUTHORIZED  AND  UNUSED 
SPACE  DESCRIBED  BY  THE  DEPARTMENT  ON  EX- 
HIBITS 47  AND  48  AND  THE  LIKE  SPACE  DESCRIBED 
IN  THE  RAILROADS'  EXHIBITS. 

Mr.  Wettling  testified  on  cross-examination  as  follows: 
Question  (by  Mr.  Stewart).  Now,  referring:  to  this  form, 
Post  Office  Department  Exhibit  No.  47,  which  is  explana- 
tory of  the  columns  on  Post  Ofhce  Department  Exhibit 
No.  48,  you  are  familiar  with  the  general  description  of 
this  class  of  excess  and  unauthorized  space  as  detailed  on 
this  form,  are  you  not  ? 

Answer.   To  a  certain  extent. 

***** 

Question.  Now,  in  order  that  we  might  get  to  a  conclu- 
sion, I  am  merely  desiring  to  identify  the  Post  Office 
Department  exhibits  and  descriptions  with  yours. 

Answer.   It  is  rather  hard  to  do,  Mr.  Stewart. 

Question.  I  mean  the  subject  matter,  not  the  descrip- 
tions themselves. 

Answer.  Oh,  the  general  subject  matter  and  the  gen- 
eral total? 

Question.  Yes. 

Answer.  We  agree  closely  as  to  that.     (.R.  1286,  1287.) 

(C)  IF  THE  SPACE  BASIS  IS  RETAINED,  THE  RAILROADS 
WILL  MAKE  CHANGES  IN  EQUIPMENT  TO  CONFORM 
TO  THE  UNITS  DETERMINED  UPON. 

Mr.  Wettling  testified  on  cross-examination  as  fol- 
lows: 

Question  (by  Mr.  Stewart).  Now,  Mr.  Wettling,  if  the 
space  basis  should  be  retained,  are  you  prepared  to  say 
that  the  railroad  companies  will  still  contmue  this  equip- 
ment as  it  is  now,  or  will  they  make  it  conform  to  the 
actual  imits  provided  by  law  ? 

Answer.  Why,  it  seems  to  me.  Mi-,  Stewart,  that  if  you 
once  definitely  determine  that  certain  stated  exact  units 
were  going  to  be  regularly  required  of  the  railroad  com- 
panies, that  they  will,  as  fast  as  they  can,  make  the  changes 
to  conform  those  units  to  the  requirements  of  the  Post 
Office  Department;  but  that  does  not  necessarily  mean 
that  they  are  going  to  save  the  operation  of  all  that  space 
that  you  relinquish.     *     *     *     (1\.  1243.) 


351 

(D)  THE  RAILROADS' CLAIM  THAT  A  REQUIREMENT  FOR 
SPACE  FOR  A  LIMITED  PART  OF  THE  WEEK  RAISES  A 
RE  SPONSIBILITY  FOR  THE  RE  ST  OF  WEEK,  ALTHOUGH 
NO  ADDITIONAL  SPACE   IS  NECESSARILY  RUN. 

■Mr.  Bradley  testified  on  cross-examination  as  follows: 

Question  (by  Mr.  Stewart)  .  Therefore  you  conclude,  Mr. 
Bradley,  that  because  it  is  difficult  for  the  railroad  company 
to  find  some  accommodating  patron  who  will  take  that 
3-foot  or  7-foot  unit  on  the  days  that  the  Post  Office  Depart- 
ment does  not  want  it,  that  you  will  charge  that  3  feet  or 
7  feet  to  the  Post  Office  Department,  whether  they  use  it 
or  not.     Now,  that  is  your  theory,  is  it  not  ? 

Answer.  I  would  not  state  it  that  way. 

Question.  Well,  is  not  that  the  effect  of  it? 

Answer.  No:  I  think  not. 

Question.  Well,  what  is  the  effect?  You  charge  it  to 
the  Post  Office  Department  ? 

Answer.  Why,  in  this  particular  we  are  in  a  special 
situation.  We  are  trying  to  estimate  or  ascertain  in  a 
composite  passenger  train  how  much  space  should  be 
charged  to  each  service.  Now,  we  turn  to  one  of  those 
services,  the  mail  service,  and  we  find  that  they  have  an 
authorization  on  Monday  and  Tuesday  only,  and  that 
practically  takes  space  in  a  train  that  runs,  let  us  say, 
daily,  including  Smiday,  takes  it  two  days  in  the  week. 
Now,  there  is  certainly  an  obligation,  this  test  period 
having  run  over  a  month,  that  where  a  service  participates 
and  authorizes  space  for  a  limited  part  of  the  week,  there 
would  be  a  responsibility  for  the  remainder  of  the  week. 
That  authorization  to-morrow  might  change  to  Monday, 
Tuesday,  and  Wednesday.  It  might  change  to  daily 
except  Simday.  It  might  change  to  any  other  one  of  the 
varieties  that  we  speak  of  here. 

Question.  Did  that  requirement  rec|uire  you  to  run  any 
more  space  m  your  tram  than  you  would  have  run  other- 
wise? 

Answer.  I  think  not. 

Question.  It  did  not  ? 

/Vnswer.  I  thmk  not.      (R.  2249,  2250.) 

(E)  THE  SUM  OF  THESE  EXCESSIVE  CHARGES  BY  THE 
RAILROADS  TO  THE  MAILS  AMOUNTS  TO  31.2  PER 
CENT  OF  THE  AUTHORIZED  SPACE. 

Mr.  Wettlixg  testified  on  cross-examination  as  follows: 
Answer.  *     *     *     so  that  these  very  large  percentages 

on  their  face  mean  but  a  very,  very  small  amount  of  the 

amount  of  space. 


352 

QiioFition  (by  Mr.  Stewart).  However,  ^Ir.  Wettling, 
after  you  had  transferred  to  this  column  16, 1  think  it  is 

Answer  (interrupting).  Unoccupied  space  in  the  mixed 
cars. 

Question.  And  included  a  pro  rata  part  of  unauthorized 
space  based  upon  the  authorized  space,  these  additions, 
you  got  a  per  cent  of  about  32,  did  you  not,  of  the  author- 
ized? 

Answer.  You  mean  as  to  the  whole  traffic  ? 

Question.  Yes. 

Answer.  I  got  31.2,  yes,  sir. 

Question.  31.2.  So  that  it  is  not  an  inconsequential 
element  after  all. 

Answer.  No,  I  didn't  claim  that,  Mr.  Stewart.  I  mean 
that  these  apparently  large  percentages  on  the  small. units, 
they  look  very  large,  but  they  really  amount  to  very  little. 

Question.  Well,  they  mean  31  per  cent,  all  together, 
after  you  have  handled  them  as  you  have  on  your  Exhibit 
6. 

Answer.  Yes;  they  are  part  of  the  31  per  cent,  of  course, 
as  to  the  total  traffic.     (R.  1276,  1277.) 

(F)  MR.  WETTLING'S  TESTIMONY  AS  TO  OPERATION 
IS  QUALIFIED  BY  THE  FACT  THAT  IT  IS  BASED 
LARGELY  UPON  HEARSAY. 

Mr.  Wettling  testified  on  cross-examination  as  follows : 

Question  (by  Mr.  Stewart)  .  Your  special  work  has  been 
largely  statistical,  I  assume  ? 

Answer.  Yes,  sir. 

Question.  Have  you  paid  any  attention  to  the  practical 
operation  of  the  train  service  during  that  period? 

Answer.  No,  sir ;  not  as  the  interpretation  would  be  as  an 
operating  man,  I  have  not. 

Question.  Have  you  paid  any  attention  to  the  practical 
operation  of  the  Railway  Mail  Service  during  that  period  ? 

Answer.  Only  as  I  made  inquiry  from  time  to  time  from 
the  operating  men  generally,  and  as  was  disclosed  in  a 
general  way  from  the  statistics  returned  for  the  test  period 
of  April,  1917. 

Question.  Then,  so  far  as  any  testimony  of  yours  is  con- 
cerned in  which  you  have  expressed  any  views  or  opinions 
in  regard  to  the  practical  operation  of  trains  or  with  refer- 
ence to  the  practical  operation  of  the  Railway  Mail  Service 
during  this  period,  it  is  based  upon  what  has  been  told  you 
by  others  ? 

Answer,  Largely;  yes,  sir. 

Question.  So  that  when  in  your  answers  you  have  used 
the  term  "as  a  practical  man,"  referring  in  that  way  to 


353 

these  subjects  that  I  am  discussing,  it  is,  of  course,  f|uaHfied 
by  the  answers  you  have  made  as  to  your  practical  knowl- 
edge % 

Answer.  Necessarily  so;  yes,  sir.  I  have  only  knowl- 
edge, as  I  said,  from  observation  and  the  analysis  of  the 
statistics  as  returned  for  the  test  period,  and  from  in- 
quiries made  from  time  to  time  from  operating  men,  and, 
necessarily,  of  course,  in  a  general  wa}?-,  l)ecausc  of  my  asso- 
ciation with  the  admmistration  and,  particularly,  to  the 
division  of  traffic,  general  analysis  of  traflic  conciiti<»ns. 

Question.  But  during  that  period  you  never  went  into  a 
railway  post-office  car  % 

Answer.  Never  went  inside  of  one;  no,  sir;  never  in  my 
life. 

Question.  Nor  .you  never  went  into  a  baggage  car  in 
which  these  3-foot  and  7-foot  units  are  authorized  % 

Answer.  I  have  only  looked  into  them.  I  have  never 
gone  inside  of  them,  not  in  the  past  two  years. 

Question.  And  you  never  gave  any  personal  considera- 
tion to  the  practicality  of  carrying  tlie  mails  in,  say  3  and 
7  and  15  foot  units  in  a  car? 

Answer.  Well,  not  in  just  that  sense,  Mr.  Stewart.  I 
have  in  the  past  had  general  observation  and  have  in  fact 
ridden  on  baggage  cars  on  a  few  occasions  and  noticed,  in 
a  general  way,  the  manner  in  which  the  traffic  was  handled. 

Question.  So  that  when  you  said  as  a  practical  man  that 
it  was  not  practical  to  authorize  these  units  in  a  baggage  car 
and  carry  the  mails  in  them,  I  infer  you  simply  meant  that 
as  you  had  observed  traffic  carried  in  these  cars,  as  a  matter 
of  fact  it  was  not  piled  up  in  units.  Is  that  what  you 
meant  % 

Answer.  Why,  I  think  you  misunderstood  me  just  a 
little  in  that.  I  did  not  say  that  I  was  giving  the  opinion 
as  a  practical  railroad  operating  man.  I  didn't  mean  it 
in  that  way.     (R.  1184-1186.) 

(G)  QUALIFICATION  OF  MR.  WETTLING'S  TESTIMONY  RE- 
GARDING THE  ALLEGED  NECESSITY  FOR  OPERATING 
"EXCESS  OVER  AUTHORIZED"  AND  "UNAUTHOR- 
IZED" SPACE  BECAUSE  OF  MAIL  AUTHORIZATIONS. 

Mr.  Wettling  testified  on  cross-examination  as  follows: 

Question  (by  Mr.  Stewart)  .     On   this   exhibit  (K.    R. 

No.  G.)  in  column  4  and  opposite  the  mail  service  you  have 

items  entered   "authorized,"    "excess   over    authorized," 

"unauthorized,"  and  so  forth 

Answer.  Yes,  sir. 

122G98— 19 23 


354 

Quostion. — opposite  the  various  classes  of  mail  in  the  mail 
service  units.  I  understood  you  to  say  that  this  service, 
which  is  designated  "excess  over  authorized"  and  "un- 
authorized," was  absolutely  necessarily  operated  by  the 
railroad  companies  because  of  the  authorizations  of  mail 
space.     Did  you  intend  to  make  that  statement? 

Answer.' Yes,  qualified  by,  as  I  think  I  did,  the  expres- 
sion "under  the  conditions  under  which  the  operations 
obtained  in  April,  1917."     *     *     * 

Question.  Now,  Mr.  Wettling,  we  will  come  to  this  ques- 
tion of  the  whole  cars  and  the  apartment  cars  later.  If 
your  theory  be  correct  as  a  w^liole — and  I  understood  you 
to  so  state  it— then  how  can  you  reconcile  it  with  the  fact 
that  all  mail,  closed-pouch  units,  are  authorized  in  baggage 
cars  which  are  run  bj^  the  railroad  companies  regardless  of 
whether  there  be  any  closed-pouch  units  authorized  in 
them  or  not? 

Ansvi^er.  Well,  that  is  largely  so,  and  in  some  respects  it 
is  not  so.     *     *     * 

Question.  Let  us  take  this  kind  of  an  example,  Mr. 
Wettling — a  closed-pouch  unit  of  3  feet  would  be  au- 
thorized from  A  to  B,  we  will  say,  for  a  distance  of 
5  miles,  in  the  usual  baggage  car,  carrying  passengers, 
baggage,  and  express,  and  the  car  continues  on  to  N,  say, 
a  distance  of  195  miles  farther;  do  you  intend  to  say  that 
the  operation  of  the  3  feet  in  the  additional  distance  of  195 
miles  was  absolutely  necessary  because  a  3-foot  length  was 
authorized  over  5  miles  of  the  run  ? 

Answer.  Not  necessarily.     *     *     * 

Question.  But  your  proposition  is  that  that  space  would 
not  be  operated  at  all  in  your  train  if  there  had  not  been  an 
authorization  of  the  mail  unit  in  that  car? 

Ansvx^^er.  They  could  not  very  well  avoid  operating  the 
space,  but  if  regularly  they  were  not  required  to  look  after 
the  mail  and  reserve  certain  space  for  it,  w^hy,  they  might 
possibly  have  removed  that  partition  in  that  car  3  feet  far- 
ther forward  and  devote  3  feet  more  space  to  the  passenger 
end  of  it  if  they  did  not  need  it. 

Question.  You  know,  do  you  not,  that  there  is  no  3  feet 
partitioned  in  the  car  at  all;  it  is  not  partitioned  off? 

Answer.  It  is  not  partitioned  off,  no.  I  thought  we  were 
still  talking  about  this  half  car  with  a  passenger  in  the  rear 
end  of  it.     You  mean  a  60-foot  baggage  car  straight? 

Question.  No;  I  am  talking  about  a  3-foot  closed-pouch 
unit. 

Answer.  In  any  car  ? 

Question.     In  any  kind  of  car  ? 


356 

Answer.  Xo,  sir;  they  would  have  run  that  60-foot  just 
the  same. 

Question.  And  yet  you  have  charged  all  of  those  excesses 
to  the  mails,  have  you  not? 

Answer.  I  have;  yes,  sir. 

Question.  Now,  in  the  above  sort  of  case,  and  where  no 
authorization  of  closed-pouch  space  is  made  in  the  return 
direction,  you  have  charged  that  to  the  mail,  too,  have  you 
not? 

Answer.  I  have;  yes,  sir. 

Question.  JBut  you  are  prepared  now  to  qualify  your 
statement,  which  was  made  rather  broadh'  on  your  direct 
examination,  that  that  operation  was  made  necessary  by 
reason  of  the  authorization  of  the  mail.     Is  that  correct? 

Answer.  As  to  that  particular  unit,  why,  yes,  we  would 
]irobably  run  a  60-foot  car  anyhov.-,  although  we  might  be 
running  a  55-foot  car  or  a  50-foot  car. 

*  *  *  *  H« 

Answer.  Let  us  take  your  example,  and  we  have  fur- 
nished a  60-foot  car  on  Sunday  or  the  one  day,  and  on  the 
other  six  days  we  have  no  need  for  the  3  feet  of  mail  space, 
the  smallest  unit  that  is  authorized.  If  we  had  no  unit 
authorized  on  any  one  day,  we  might  be  using  a  shorter  car; 
but  we  will  certainly  not  run  a  60-foot  car  on  one  day  and  a 
57-foot  car  on  six  days,  because  that  would  certainlv  be 
penny- wise  operation,  and  I  don't  think  any  railroad  man- 
ager would  let  a  60-foot  car  lie  idle  in  his  car  yard  d&js  in 
order  to  save  carrj-uag  the  extra  3  feet  of  space  for  that  six 
days. 

Question.  Of  course,  they  would  not. 

Answer.  Xo. 

Question.  Therefore  that  disposes,  does  it  not,  of  your 
contention  that  the  3-foot  unit  would  necessarily  be  carried 
on  the  six  days  because  it  was  authorized  on  the  seventh 
da}',  and  you  assume  the  railroad  company  would  operate 
the  60-foot  car  anyhow? 

Answer.  It  would,  but  I  don't  think  that  disposes  of  my 
theory.     If  you  think  so,  why,  it  is  all  right. 

Answer.  I  would  think  that  when  we  talk  about  3-foot 
and  7-foot  closed-pouch  service  it  is  so  ver}^  sPiall  that  what 
you  say  n-'.ight  possibly  be  the  case.  We  might  be  running 
the  car  anyway.  But,  certainly,  provision  is  made  for  car- 
rying of  the  mail,  and  we  must  always  be  ready,  even  at  the 
initial  point  of  the  journey,  if  the  authorization  is  for  less 
than  at  some  other  point  of  the  journey;  we  must  arrange 
our  loading  of  the  car  in  such  a  way  that  we  are  prepared 


356 

to  meet  the  oxtremc  authorization  on  that  run.  I,  as  I 
said  before,  fio;iire  that  is  a  question  of  readiness  to  serve. 
We  must  always  be  ready  to  serve  the  niaxinunn  space. 

Question.  Now,  I  understand  you  to  have  qualified  your 
general  answers  thus  far  in  admitting  that  you  were  not 
strictly  correct,  that  the  companies  were  obliged  to  operate 
that  space  in  behalf  of  the  mails,  but  you  still  think  that  the 
companies  should  hold  themselves  in  readiness  with  that 
space  to  accommodate  the  mails  that  are  offered.  That  is 
your  position  now? 

Answer.  Yes.  Permit  me,  first,  to  say  if  I  feaid  anything 
that  qualifies  what  I  had  said  before,  I  did  not  mean  to, 
but  I  do  think  that  the  company  must  at  all  times  be  pre- 
pared to  furnish  whatever  space  the  Post  Office  Depart- 
ment demands  of  them,  regularly.  I  don't  mean,  now,  as 
to  emergency  space,  necessarily,  although  they  must  do  the 
best  they  can  to  furnish  that  also. 

Question.  I  think,  so  far  as  your  qualifications  are  con- 
cerned, we  can  let  the  record  stand.  It  will  evidence  what- 
ever thev  mav  be. 

Answer.  Certainly.  (R.  1190,  1191,  1192,  1193,  1194, 
1195,  1197,  1198,  1199,  1200.) 

Question  (by  Mr.  Stewart).  Now,  confuiing  youi-self  to 
these  units  still,  and  with  reference  to  your  answer,  do  you 
know  of  a  single  case  in  the  service  where  the  company  is 
compelled  to  operate  more  equipment  than  it  would  other- 
wise operate  to  take  care  of  one  of  these  units  ? 

Answer.  One  of  these  3  or  7  foot  units  ? 

Question.  Yes. 

Answer.  No,  sir,  I  do  not. 

Question.  And  did  3'ou  ever  hear  of  a  case? 

Answer.  I  don't  remember  hearing  of  a  single  case,  no, 
where  for  the  running  of  a  3-foot  or  7-foot  unit  we  had  to 
put  on  another  car.  I  should  be  surprised  to  learn  that 
there  was  such  a  case.     (R.  1203,  1204.) 

As  to  the  3-foot,  7-foot,  and  15-foot  storage  units,  he 
testified  as  folio  wis: 

Question.  Now,  let  us  take  up  the  3-foot,  7-foot,  and 
15-foot  storage  units  in  baggage  cars.  Do  you  know  how 
those  are  authorized  ?  Or,  rather,  I  will  put  the  question. 
Is  it  not  true  that  they  are  authorized  in  the  same  manner 
as  the  closed-pouch  unit — ^the  regular  service  ? 

Answer.  Very  much  the  same  way,  yes. 

Question.  Now,  is  it  not  true  that  practically  all  you  have 
said  in  regard  to  closed-pouch  units  applies  to  these  3-foot, 


357 

7-foot,  and  15-foot  storage  units?  It  is  practically  the 
same  situation,  is  it  not? 

Answer.  Tlie  situation  is  pretty  much  the  same,  except- 
ing, howe'rer,  that  there  might  be  some  modification  in  my 
answers  if  applied  to  15-foot  units.  That  being  a  so  much 
larger  part  of  a  car,  there  could  be  occasions  wdien  it  would 
demand  extra  ecpipment,  whereas  a  3-foot  or  7-foot  au- 
thorization might  not. 

Question.  But  you  don't  know  of  any  such  case  ? 

Answer.  No,  I  don't;  no  definite  case  that  I  could  cite 
you. 

Question.  And  I  presume  that  you  are  willing  to  say  that 
the  operation — speaking  now  of  the  railroad  operation — of 
the  train  has  been  substantially  the  same  under  the  space- 
basis  system  as  it  was  under  the  weight-basis  system  in 
regard  to  the  cars  in  which  these  units  are  authorized  ? 

Answer.  As  to  the  units  themselves  ? 

Question.  Yes. 

Answ^er.  I  should  say  that  there  has  been  no  perceptible 
change  as  to  the  units  under  30  feet.     (E.  1213,  1214.) 

Question.  Just  a  moment,  referring  back  to  these  3-foot, 
7-foot,  and  15-foot  units  in  baggage  cars,  I  will  ask  you  if  it 
is  not  true  that  you  charge  to  the  mails  all  of  that  excess 
and  unauthorized  space  reported  in  connection  with 
those  units,  just  as  you  did  in  regard  to  the  closed-pouch 
units  ? 

Answer.  Yes,  sir.     (R.  1215.) 

Also  as  to  the  30-foot  storage  units: 

Question.  Now,  let  us  take  up  the  storage  units  of  30 
feet  in  baggage  cars.  Do  you  know  of  any  difference  in 
the  manner  of  operation,  authorization  of  operation,  in 
regard  to  these  units  than  jou  have  detailed  in  regard  to 
the  lesser  units  ? 

Answer.  Not  as  to  the  general  administration  of  the 
space;  no.     (R.  1214,  1215.) 


358 

THE  RAILROADS  REPORTED  AND  CHARGED  TO  THE  MAILS 
EVERY   POSSIBLE    EXCESS    AND    UNAUTHORIZED    SPACE 
MOVE^IENT  IN  BOTH  DIRECTIONS,  BUT  REPORTED  ONLY 
THE  ACTUAL  SPACE  USED  FOR  EXPRESS,  BAGGAGE,  AND 
MISCELLANEOUS   IN   EACH   DIRECTION   SEPARATELY   IN 
MIXED   CARS. 
THE  RAILROADS  REPORTED  ONLY  THE  ACTUAL  SPACE 
USED   IN   THE    EXPRESS    SERVICE   IN   MIXED  CARS, 
WHILE  WITH  REFERENCE  TO  THE  MAILS  THEY  RE- 
PORTED AND  CHARGED  TO  THE  MAILS  EVERY  POS- 
SIBLE EXCESS  SPACE  OPERATION. 

Mr.  McBride  testified  on  re-direct  examination  as 
follows : 

Question  (by  Mr.  Stewart).  In  making  the  reports  upon 
these  classes  of  unauthorized  and  unused  space,  what  did 
the  railroad  companies  report  with  respect  to  express 
service  ? 

Answer.  They  reported,  as  I  understand  it,  and  the 
instructions  so  specified,  the  actual  used  space  in  the 
express  serA^ce  in  mixed  cars. 

Question.  So  that  in  comparison  with  these  various 
classes  of  service,  unauthorized  and  unused,  as  tabulated 
in  these  exhibits  with  respect  to  the  mails,  there  were  no 
such  reports  made  by  the  railroad  companies  with  respect 
to   the  express  service? 

Answer.  Not  as  to  mixed  cars.  I  beheve,  in  some  cases, 
there  were  some  deadhead  movements  of  full  express  cars 
reported  by  the  companies,  but  no  unused  or  unauthorized 
space  in  mixed  cars. 

Question.  So  that  while  the  railroad  companies  reported 
as  against  the  mails,  every  possible  excess  space  in  cars  and 
every  possible  excess  in  unauthorized  operation  of  space  in 
cars,  and  days  upon  which  no  authorizations  were  made,  as 
against  the  mails,  they  did  not  report  any  such  movement 
as  against  the  express  ? 

Answer.   Not  that  I  am  aware  of.     (R.  467,  468.) 

RAILROADS  CLAIMED  IT  IMPRACTICABLE  TO  REPORT 
SPACE  IN  EXPRESS  SERVICE  CORRESPONDING  TO 
THE  EXCESS,  UNAUTHORIZED,  AND  UNUSED  SPACE 
REPORTED  IN  CONNECTION  WITH  THE  MAIL. 

Mr.  McBride  testified  on  re-direct  examination  as  follows: 
Question  (by  Mr.  Stewart).  Now,  I  want  to  call  your 
attention  to  those  conferences  to  which  counsel  for  the  rail- 
roads has  referred,  and  I  ask  you  what  your  recollection  is 
*  *  *  as  to  the  manner  in  which  they  desired  the  ex- 
press data  reported  ? 


359 

Answer.  They  wished  the  express  s]:)ace  reported  to 
represent  only  the  space  actually  used. 

Question.  Did  the  railroads  agree  to  that? 

Answer.  That  was  the  railroad  proposition. 

Question.  How  about  the  re])orts  with  reference  to  the 
express  matter  that  corresponds  with  this  unused  and 
unauthorized  ojieration? 

Answer.  No  provision  was  made  for  that  kind  of  a  report. 
They  claimed  it  could  not  be  gotten. 

Question.  Did  not  the  representatives  of  the  Post  Olhce 
Department  ask  that  it  be  gotten  ? 

Answer.  They  did. 

Question.  And  the  railroad  companies  said  it  could  not 
be  gotten  ? 

Answer.  That  is  my  recollection. 

Question.  Did  they  omit  all  such  reports  from  their 
reports  to  the  department  ? 

Answer.  In  so  far  as  mixed  cars  aie  concerned.  (R.  534, 
535.) 

SIMILAR  UNUSED  SPACE  OCCURS  IN  CONNECTION  WITH 
EXPRESS  SERVICE  AS  OCCURS  IN  CONNECTION  WITH 
MAIL  SERVICE,  AND  SHOULD  HAVE  BEEN  REPORTED 
IN  THE  SAME  MANNER  TO  MAKE  THE  STATISTICS 
FOR  THE   TWO    SERVICES   COMPARABLE. 

Ml".  McBride  testified  on  re-cross  exammation  as  follows : 

Question  (by  Mr.  Wood).  So,  if  there  is  any  express 
space  which  is  analogous  to  this  difference  in  the  minimum 
and  maximum  authorizations  of  the  mail,  the  express 
space  is  the  used  space  ? 

Answer.  I  can  not  admit  that.  Unquestionably,  you 
have  the  same  character  of  space  in  connection  with  the 
express  service. 

Question.  But  we  have  nothmg  like  the  difference 
between  the  maximum  and  minimum  authorization;  we 
have  the  used  space  that  we  reported  for  tlie  express, 
and  you  refused  to  have  it  reported  for  the  mail. 

Answer.  Yes;  but  you  have  return  movement  in  the 
express  space.  If  you  run  a  car  with  20  feet  of  express 
in  one  train,  and  only  use  5  feet  in  the  return  train,  you 
report  the  20  in  one  direction  and  5  in  the  other.  Now, 
if  it  was  proper  to  charge,  under  those  conditions,  in  the 
mail  service,  15  feet  back  as  unauthorized  space,  why  is 
it  not  proper  to  charge  tlie  same  amount  of  space  in  the 
express  service  on  the  return  trip  ? 

Question.  That  is,  we  charged  the  used  space  in  respect 
to  express,  and  the  only  reason  we  did  not  report  the  used 


360 

space  in  respect  to  the  mail  iu  both  directions  was  because 
you  wouki  not  k>t  us. 

uiVnswer,  You  reported  the  authorized  space. 

Question.  I  say,  the  only  reason  we  did  not  do  it  for 
both  alike  is  because  you  would  not  let  us. 

Answer.  Well,  it  gets  back  to  the  same  old  statement, 
that  we  consider  the  authorized  space  as  the  used  space. 
OX.  539,  540.) 

MOVEMENT   OF   FULL   EXPRESS   CARS   NOT   THE    SAME 
IN   BOTH   DIRECTIONS. 

Mr.  McBride  testified  on  direct  examination  as  follows: 

I  wish  next  to  take  up  the  question  of  the  return  move- 
ments of  baoga^re,  miscellaneous,  and  express  service  in 
mixed  cars,  and  its  bearing  upon  this  Cjuestion  of  distribu- 
tion of  unoccupied  space. 

Some  of  the  witnesses  testifying  for  the  railroads  stated 
that  that  movement  in  the  express  service  on  their  roads 
was  about  the  same  in  each  direction;  that  is,  that  it 
very  nearly  balanced.  I  have  made  some  examination 
of  the  reports  submitted  by  the  companies,  and  desire  to 
invite  attention  to  some  of  the  results  secured. 

Question  (by  Mr.  Stewart).  Now,  that  statement  was 
with  reference  to  the  service  not  carried  in  full  cars  ? 

Answer.  That  is  true.  At  the  same  time  I  thought  I 
would  like  to  make  a  sort  of  comparison  between  opera- 
tions of  full  cars  as  well,  full  express  cars,  to  see  if  the 
movement  in  both  directions  was  anywhere  near  balanced. 
*  *  *  On  the  Pennsylvania  Lines  west  of  Pittsburgh, 
on  the  Pittsburgh  &  St.  Louis  route,  the  westbound  full 
car  movement  in  express  as  shown  on  the  reports  submitted 
was  11,630,000  for  the  period,  while  in  return  it  was 
15,924,000,  a  difference  of  4,293,000  car-foot  miles. 

On  the  route  between  Pittsburgh  and  Chicago  the  west- 
bound express  was  23,500,000  and  the  eastbound 
21,062,000. 

On  the  Pittsburgh  and  Cincinnati  route  tJie  movement 
more  nearly  equalized,  the  westbound  movement  utilizing 
4,000,000  car-foot  miles  and  the  eastbound  movement 
3,900,000  car-foot  miles,  or  a  difference  of  only  119,000 
car-foot  miles. 

On  these  routes  the  full  mail  car  and  storage  car  move- 
ments practically  balanced  each  other. 

Question.  Now,  there  is  a  total  difference  in  the  routes, 
so  far  as  the  express  was  concerned,  of  how  much  ? 

Answer.  Nearly  7,000,000  car-foot  miles  for  the  period. 

Question.  That  is  as  reported  by  the  companies  ? 


361 

.\iiswer.  As  reported  by  the  companies.  I  don't  know 
how  they  get  their  cars  back  to  bring  out  the  movement. 
I  assume  they  use  them  in  some  other  service,  perhaps.  I 
am  givmg  vou  the  figures  as  reported  bv  the  companies. 
(R.  3877;3878.) 

DIFFERENCE  BETWEEN  DEPARTMENT  AND  RAILROADS 
IS  NOT  WITH  REFERENCE  TO  THE  USED  SPACE  BUT 
TO  THE  EXCESS  CLAIMS  OF  UNAUTHORIZED  AND 
UNUSED   MOVEMENTS. 

Mr.  McBride  testified  on  re-direct  examination  as  follows: 

Question  (by  Mr.  Stewart).  Mr.  McBride,  they  did 
report  the  used  space  for  the  mails,  did  they  not,  as 
measured  by  the  authorization  ? 

.\nswer.  Absolutely. 

Question.  And  the  difference  between  the  department 
and  the  railroads  is  not  with  reference  to  the  used  space, 
but  with  reference  to  this  excess  claim  of  unauthorized 
movement  and  excessive  space  ? 

Answer.  That  is  right. 

Question.  So  that  the  questions  which  have  been  asked 
you  in  regard  to  that  matter  do  not  relate  at  all  to  the 
matter  in  controversy,  which  is  the  excessive  claim  made 
for       *       *       *       unauthorized  space  ? 

Answer.     I  do  not  see  that  they  have. 

Question.  The  used  space  having  been  reported  as  the 
railroads  claimed  in  the  case  of  the  express,  and  reported 
on  the  basis  of  authorization  for  mails,  which  the  depart- 
ment contends  is  used  space  ? 

Answer.  That  is  right.     (R.  540,  541.) 

PEAK  LOAD  IN  THE  EXPRESS  SERVICE  REPORTED  IN- 
DEPENDENTLY IN  EACH  DIRECTION. 

Mr.  Searle  testified  on  cross-examination  as  follows: 

Question  (by  ]\Ir.  Stewart).  You  referred  to  the  manner 
in  which  you  say  the  company — ^your  company — reported 
the  operations  on  the  baggage  and  the  express.  You  said 
they  reported  the  peak  load.  What  did  they  do  with 
respect  to  express  on  the  return  movement  ? 

Answer.  Peak  load.     They  reported  the  peak  load. 

Question.  Did  they  report  the  peak  load  in  both  direc- 
tions ? 

Answer.  Yes,  sir;  in  both  directions. 

Question.  On  the  return  they  reported  the  peak  load  on 
the  outward  movement  ^ 

Answer.  In  both  directions. 


362 

Question.  If  there  was  a  load  in  the  car  on  the  outward 
trip  they  reported  a  peak  load,  and  with  respect  to  the 
load  on  the  inward  trip  they  reported  a  peak  load  there? 

Answer.  Yes,  sir;  that  is  right. 

Question.  They  did  not  report  the  peak  load  which  was 
the  highest  in  either  direction,  both  outward  and  inward  ? 

Answer.  They  reported  the  peak  load  in  each  direction. 

Question.  Independently? 

Answer.  Independently.     (R.  2149,  2150.) 

MAXIMUM  SPACE  CHARGED  TO  THE  MAILS  IN  BOTH  DI- 
RECTIONS. 

Mr.  Fairfield  testified  on  cross-examination  as  follows: 

Question  (by  Mr.  Stewart).  Now,  Mr,  Fairfield,  refer- 
ring further  to  these  mixed  cars;  wherever  a  mail  authori- 
zation was  made  of  space  in  them  you  charged  the  maximum 
at  any  point  clear  to  the  end  of  the  entire  run? 

Answer.  Yes,  sir. 

Question.  Without  regard  to  any  changes  whatever  in 
the  authorization  by  the  department  ? 

Answer.  Yes,  sir. 

Question.  For  instance,  if  an  authorization  was  for  a 
7-foot  storage  unit  in  a  baggage  car,  and  at  some  point  on 
the  run  of  that  car  it  is  reduced  to  a  3-foot  unit,  and  that 
then  discontinued  at  another  point,  you  charge  the  7  feet 
clear  through  to  the  end  of  the  run  ? 

Attorney  Examiner  Brown.  And  back? 

Question,   (by  Mr.  Stewart).     And  back? 

Answer.  And  back. 

Question.  Now,  that  return  movement  I  think  you 
gave — or  I  don't  know  whether  you  gave  it  or  not,  but  it 
represents,  under  ''E,"  on  our  exhibit,  1,728,000  car-foot 
miles,  and  that  is  return  only  of  this  movement  which  we 
are  discussing. 

Answer.  Yes,  sir.     (R.  2340,  2341.) 

*  *  *    '  *  * 

Question.  In  all  cases  of  authorizations,  whether  they 
be  for  authorizations  in  the  mixed  cars  or  whether  they  be 
apartments,  full  railway  post  offices,  or  storage  cars,  you 
charged  in  every  instance  the  maximum  in  both  ways  ? 

Answer.     Yes,  sir. 

Question.  Take  your  sheets  here,  you  charged  the  maxi- 
mum in  both  ways? 

Answer.  Yes,  sir.  The  reason  I  hesitated  on  that 
answer,  there  were  some  cases  where  I  think  we  did  not 
charge  to  the  mail  the  return  space  because  it  was  used 
for  other  classes  of  traffic. 


363 

Question.  Yes,  of  course  that  would  be  excepted.  (R. 
2343,  2344.) 

PEAK  LOAD  IN  EACH  DIRECTION  SEPARATELY  CHARGED 
TO  THE  EXPRESS. 

Mr.  Fairfield  testified  on  cross-examination  as  follows: 

Question  (by  Mr.  Stewart).  Now,  in  regard  to  the 
express,  you  said  you  charged  the  peak  load ;  that  is,  the 
peak  load  in  one  direction  was  charged  to  the  movement 
in  that  direction? 

Answer.  Each  direction. 

Question.  We  will  take  one  direction  at  a  time  ? 

Answer.  Yes,  sir. 

Question.  Say  the  outward  direction? 

Answer.  Yes,  sir. 

Question.  The  peak  load  was  charged  there,  and  on  the 
return  movement  you  charged  the  peak  load  on  the  return 
operation  ? 

Answer.  Yes,  sir;  both  ways — each  wa}^. 

Question.  Each  way.  So  that  you  did  not  charge  the 
peak  load  of  both  movements  as  applied  to  both  opera- 
tions, but  each  movement  separately? 

Answer.  Separately. 

Question.  But  when  you  came  to  the  mail  you  did  charge 
the  peak  load  which  would  be  found  in  one  direction  in 
both  directions  ? 

Answer.  Yes,  sir;  the  authorized  space. 

Question.  What  did  you  do  with  regard  to  the  express — - 
the  same  thing  as  the  baggage  ? 

Answer.  The  peak  load  in  each  direction.  (R.  2341, 
2342.) 

IP  NO  EXPRESS  WAS  CARRIED  IN  RETURN  MOVEMENT 
NO  CHARGE  OF  SPACE  TO  EXPRESS  WAS  MADE,  AL- 
THOUGH WHERE  NO  MAILS  WERE  CARRIED  IN  RE- 
TURN MOVEMENT  A  CHARGE  OF  SPACE  WAS  MADE 
TO  THE  MAILS. 

Mr.  Fairfield  testified  on  cross-examination  as  follows: 

Question  (by  Mr.  Stewart).  Now,  with  regard  to  the 
return  movement  of  express,  where  no  express  was  carried 
in  the  car  you  did  not  charge  anything  to  the  express  ? 

Answer.  That  would  be  so  if  we  had  any  such  case. 
*     *     *     (R.  2342.) 

Question.  But  if  there  were  cases  where  no  express  was 
carried  you  did  not  charge  anything  to  the  express  ? 

Answer.  No,  sir. 

Question.  But  you  did  to  the  mails  ? 

Answer.  Yes,  sir.     (R.  2343.) 


364 

MISCELLANEOUS  AND  BAGGAGE  TREATED  IN  SAME 
MANNER  AS  EXPRESS. 

Mr.  Fairfield  testified  on  cross-examination  as  follows: 
Question  (by  Mr.  Stewart).  And  you  treated  the  mis- 
cellaneous in  the  same  way  that  you  did  the  baggage  and 
express  ? 

Answer.  Tlie  same  way;  yes.     (R.  2343.) 

EXPRESS,  BAGGAGE,  AND  MISCELLANEOUS  SPACE  NOT 
TREATED  IN   SAME  MANNER  AS  THE  MAILS. 

Mr.  McCahan  testified  on  cross-examination  as  follows : 

Question  (by  ^Ir.  Stewart).  But  would  you  report 
that  in  regard  to  mails  in  all  cases  ? 

Answer.  Yes,  sir;  we  try  to  comply  as  literally  as  pos- 
sible wdth  the  instructions. 

Question.  Tliose  were  the  instructions  of  the  department? 

Answer.  I  was  thinking  about  the  forms.  It  was  under- 
stood that  w^e  would  report  returned  space  of  that  character. 

Question,  It  was  understood  by  the  railroads  that  you 
would  report  that  space  in  any  manner  5^ou  saw  fit  ? 

Answer.  But  wasn't  it  also  understood  by  the  depart- 
ment that  we  would  report  it  that  way  ? 

Question.  Oh,  the  department  did  not  attempt  to  dic- 
tate to  the  railroads  how  they  would  report  this  space, 
provided  they  gave  the  information  upon  the  forms  as 
called  for. 

Answer.  That  is  what  I  was  talking  about. 

Question.  There  was  no  agreement  by  the  department 
for  you  to  report  the  return  on  the  form  in  regard  to  the 
peak  load  ? 

Answer.  I  consider  it  was,  in  a  way,  an  agreem,ent,  from 
the  fact  that  the  instructions  that  the  railroads  put  out 
were  firet  submitted  to  you. 

Question.  With  the  understanding,  of  course,  that  such 
reports  as  you  might  make  would  be  subject  to  handling 
before  the  commission  as  each  party  might  see  fit  ? 

Answer.  But  that  is  a  different  proposition.  I  am 
speaking  about  the  railroads  reporting  this  stuff.  The 
complaint,  I  understand  from  you  now,  is  that  the  rail- 
roads reported  this  returned  space.  That  is  the  way  I 
understood  your  question. 

Question,  Yes. 

Answer.  And  I  don't  see  any  objection  to  the  railroads 
reporting  that,  because  if  they  had  not  reported  it  they 
would  have  violated  the  instructions. 

Question.  They  would  not  have  violated  the  instruc- 
tions, but  they  might  have  violated  the  wishes  of  the  rail- 


365 

wa}'  companies.  Is  it  not  true,  so  far  as  the  instructions 
are  concerned,  that  the  department  agreed  to  have  that 
space  reported  in  that  way,  in  order  tEat  the  facts  might 
be  shown  to  the  commission  ? 

Answer.  Well,  I  don't  see  any  complaint  against  the 
railroads  for  reporting  it  that  way. 

Question.  Let  m.e  point  out  the  matter  of  complaint, 
then.  If  that  is  true,  why  did  jou  not  go  to  the  same 
trouble  that  you  went  to  in  reporting  the  express  ? 

Answer.  You  are  speaking  about  the  Baltimore  &  Ohio, 
I  suppose  ? 

Question.  Yes;  the  things  you  are  familiar  with. 

Answer.  So  far  as  the  Baltimore  &  Ohio  is  concerned, 
on  express,  if  such  a  rule  had  applied,  we  could  not  have 
used  it. 

Question.  Wliy  not  ? 

xVnswer.  Because  our  traffic  was  so  well  balanced 
between  the  East  and  West,  there  would  not  have  been 
any  room  for  it.  I  will  explain  to  you  in  a  minute  what 
I  mean.  The  total  car-foot  miles  made  by  express  in 
mixed  cars,  which  included  the  westbound  and  eastbound 
movement,  was  30,419,706.  Of  that  amount,  50.54  per 
cent  went  westbound  and  49.46  per  cent  went  eastbound. 

Question.  Now,  you  are  referring  to  the  full  cars? 

Answer.  No;  I  am  referring  to  mixed  cars.  On  our 
full  cars,  there  was  a  difference  of  about  700,000  out  of 
about  60,000,000.  The  full  cars  came  back  and  were 
charged,  and  this  space  in  the  mixed  cars  used  by  express 
was  charged  back,  the  same  as  it  went  out,  because  it  was 
used.     We  would  not  have  found  room  to  do  it. 

Question.  But  if  it  had  been  mail,  you  would  find  room 
to  report  it? 

Answer.  We  would  have  found  room;  yes,  sir. 

Question.  You  reported  the  maximum? 

Answer.  We  reported  the  maximum. 

Question.  You  did  not  do  that  in  the  case  of  express? 

Answer.  No;  I  did  not  attempt  to  do  it,  because  there 
was  no  understanding;  there  was  not  one  word  said  about 
reportmg  this  returned  express  jpace. 

Question.  You  do  not  recall  that  the  department  asked 
you  to  report  express  in  the  same  way  that  you  would 
report  the  mails? 

Answer.  Absolutel}^  not,  because  we  could  not  report 
the  mails  in  the  same  manner  that  we  reported  the  express. 
I  don't  recall  that  we  were  to  report  the  express  return 
movement  the  same  as  we  reported  the  mail. 


366 

Question.  But  it  is  a  fact  that  you  did  not  treat  express, 
l)ao;«j:aoje,  and  miscellaneous  in  the  same  manner  you 
treated  the  mail  in  making  these  reports? 

Answer.  That  is  correct.  We  did  not,  but  we  would 
not  hare  had  room  for  it  if  we  wanted  to  do  it. 

Question.  Well,  couldn't  you  have  found  room  ? 

Answer.  About  one-half  of  1  per  cent. 

Question.  Even  that  approximate  balance  of  your 
express  relates  only  to  your  own  road  ? 

Answer.  Of  course,  I  am  not  talking  for  other  roads — 
only  for  the  Baltimore  &  Ohio. 

Question.  However,  the  same  principle  is  involved, 
although  there  may  be  an  approximate  balance.  (E,.  2499- 
2503.) 

EXPRESS  SPACE  REPORTED  BY  BALTIMORE  &  OHIO 
BASED  ON  AVERAGE  REQUIREMENTS;  NO  RETURN 
SPACE  REPORTED. 

Mr.  McCaiian  testified  on  cross-examination  as  follows: 

Question,  (by  Mr.  Stewart).  In  reporting  the  space  for 
the  express,  did  you  report  it  in  the  same  manner  as  has 
been  described  by  the  other  witnesses  for  the  railroads  ? 

Answer.  Well,  our  instructions  provided  that  the  express 
should  be  based  on  average  recjuirements. 

Question.  Will  you  explain  that  ?  What  is  the  effect  of 
that? 

Answer.  Well,  I  do  not  know  what  the  effect  was,  other 
than  what  we  reported. 

Question.  And  did  you  report  express  in  reference  to  the 
return  movement  ? 

Answer.  We  did  not  report  the  return  movement  for 
express,  and  we  could  not  have  done  it,  if  we  wanted  to  do 
it.     *     *     *     (R.  2498.) 

THEORY  OF  THE  RAILROADS  IN  CHARGING  EXCESS  AND 
UNAUTHORIZED   SPACE  TO  MAIL  SERVICE. 

Mr.  Bradley,  in  his  direct  testimony,  in  reply  to  an 
inquiry  of  Attorney  Examiner  Brown,  testified  as  follows: 

Question  (by  Attorney  Examiner  Brow^n).  When  you 
speak  there  of  authorization,  suppose  there  were  7  feet 
authorized  in  a  baggage  car.  I  think  that  was  explained 
by  Mr.  Wettling,  but  I  want  it  explained  again  so  that  I 
shall  have  it  fastened  in  my  memory.  What  part  do  you 
charge  up  to  the  mail  service  ? 

Answer.  Well,  we  charge  under  various  forms.  We 
charge  as  authorized  precisely  what  they  authorize.  Then 
beyond  that  we  charge  the  excess  space  that  we  believe 


367 

under  the  rules  determined  upon  is  properly  chargeable  to 
that  mail  space.  Now,  that  would  include  the  over- 
mileage  where  the  car  ran  beyond  the  limit  or  the  destina- 
tion of  the  authorization. 

Question.  That  was  what  I  was  getting  at. 

Answer.  Yes,  sir. 

Question.  That  includes  not  only  the  space  operated  to 
take  care  of  the  7  feet  of  authorized  space,  but  the  move- 
ment of  that  baggage  car  through  from  point  of  origin  to 
ultimate  destination  ? 

Answer.  Yes,  sir.     (R.  2192.) 

PREPONDERANCE  OF  MOVEMENT  OF  EXPRESS,  BAG- 
GAGE, AND  MISCELLANEOUS  IN  ONE  DIRECTION 
TYPICAL  OF  ALL   SECTIONS  OF  THE  COUNTRY. 

'SLr.  McBride  testified  on  direct  examination  as  follows: 

As  regards  the  space  devoted  to  baggage,  miscellaneous, 
and  express  in  mixed  cars,  the  railroads  reported  only 
the  actually  used  space  in  each  direction.  I  have  made 
examination  of  a  large  number  of  reports  rendered  by 
various  companies  in  all  sections  of  the  country  and  have 
made  a  comparison  between  the  car-foot  miles  shown 
for  outward  trains  and  those  shown  for  inward  trains. 
On  a  great  many  routes 

Question  (by  ]Mr.  Wood),  Are  3'ou  talking  about  mixed 
cars  now? 

AnsAver.  Yes,  sir.  And  I  think  the  results  are  illuminat- 
ing as  showing  the  effect  of  the  failure  of  the  companies 
to  allow  an  equalizing  retiu"n  movement  in  those  services 
similar  to  that  claimed  in  connection  with  the  mail  service 
as  had  in  the  division  of  unoccupied  space  in  the  mixed  cars. 
I  have  selected  at  random  routes  from  a  great  many 
companies,  quite  a  large  number  of  them,  located  in  all 
parts  of  the  country.  I  am  going  to  read  some  of  them, 
giving  the  figm-es  covering  the  entries  made  by  the  rail- 
roads as  space  necessary  in  the  thi-ee  services  outbound 
and  inbound  and  the  difference.  I  am  going  to  read  them 
from  different  parts  of  the  country,  to  show  that  it  is 
typical  all  over  the  country — such  preponderance  of 
movi?ment   in   one    direction."^*     *     *      (K.    3878,3879.) 

Mr.  McBride  then  read  the  following  specific  cases  taken 
from  the  reports  of  the  railroad  companies  illustrating  the 
differences. 

Answer.  On  the  Yazoo  &  Mississippi  Valley,  between 
Clarksdale  and  Yazoo  City,  the  baggac^e  service  in  one 
direction  was  49,800,  and  in  the  other  direction  48,200,  a 
discrepancy  of  1,600  car-foot  miles. 


368 

Question  (b}-  Mr.  Wood).  You  would  not  call  that  a 
balanced  movement  ? 

A.  Not  in  the  way  that  the  mail  movement  has  been 
balanced. 

Question.  What? 

Answer.  Not  in  the  way  that  the  balance  has  been  made 
in  the  mail  movement. 

Question.  I  just  want  to  get  your  definition  of  what  a 
balanced  movement  is. 

Mr.  Stfavart.  If  you  had  charged  it  up  the  same  way 
you  did  the  mails,  but  you  have  not. 

Mr.  Wood.  If  that 'is  the  Post  Office  Department's 
definition  of  an  unbalanced  movement,  I  should  be  glad 
to  get  it.  .,        1  , 

Mr.  Stewart.  We  are  just  talking  about  the  railroads 
way  of  getting  at  it. 

Answer  (coiitinuing) .  The  express,  southbound,  86,900; 
northbomid,  SI, 600. 

Question  (by  Mr.  Wood).  Aiid  you  call  that  unbal- 
anced ? 

Answer.  A  difference  of  5,400.  That  is  a  small  route. 
We  will  take  a  large  route,  Memphis  to  New  Orleans.  The 
northbound  movement  in  the  baggage  service  was  586,000, 
in  round  numbers;  southbound,  621,000  car-foot  miles,  or 
a  difference  of  34,000. 

Question.  You  -call  that  unbalanced  ? 

Answer.  Yes,  sir;  miscellaneous  service,  northbound, 
322,000  car-foot  miles;  southbound,  366,000  car-foot 
miles;  a  difference  of  44,000  car-foot  miles. 

Express  service,  northbound,  898,000  car-foot  miles; 
southbound,  638,000  car-foot  miles;  a  difference  of  260,000 
car-foot  miles. 

On  the  Illinois  Central  Railroad,  route  143507,  Chicago 
to  Sioux  Citv,  eastbound,  baggage  761,000  car-foot  miles; 
westbound,  942,000  car-foot  miles;  a  difference  of  181,000 
car-foot  miles. 

Miscellaneous  service  on  this  route  practically  balances. 

The  express  service,  eastbound,  1,373,000  car-foot  miles; 
westbound,  1,815,000  car-foot  miles;  a  difference  of  442,000 
car-foot  miles. 

Chicago  to  Carbondale,  northbound,  basgage,  1,080,000; 
southbound,  957,000  car-foot  miles;  a  difference  of  123,000 
car-foot  miles. 

Miscellaneous  service,  204,000  car-foot  miles  northbound; 
218,000  car-foot  miles  southbound;  a  difference  of  13,000 
car-foot  miles. 


369 

Express,  1.103.000  car-foot  miles  Jiorthbound:  923,000 
oar-foot  miles  southbound;  a  difference  of  170.000  car-foot 
miles. 

That  extends  even  to  the  small  routes.  Champaign  to 
Havana,  the  same  company,  westbound,  baggage,  84,000 
car-foot  miles;  eastbound,  24,000  car-foot  miles:  9,000 
car-foot  miles  difference. 

In  the  miscellaneous,  westbound,  9.000  car-foot  miles; 
eastbound.  15.000  car-foot  miles;  a  difference  of  6.000 
car-foot  miles. 

Express,  westbound.  37,000  car-foot  miles;  eastbound, 
30.000  car-foot  miles;  a  difference  of  7,000  car-foot  miles. 

Atlantic  Coast  Lhie,  route  123513,  Jacksonville  to  Port 
Tampa  *  *  *  baggage  service,  914,000  car-foot  miles; 
return,  537,000  car-foot  miles;  a  difference  of  376,000  car- 
foot  miles. 

Miscellaneous,  184,000  westbound;  eastbound,  154,000 
car-foot  miles;  a  difference  of  30,000  car-foot  miles. 

In  the  express,  the  difference  is  11,000  car-foot  miles, 
there  behig  64,000  carried  southbound  and  53,000  north- 
bound. 

I  am  just  going  to  read  from  the  different  sections  of  the 
country,  to  show  that  this  is  typical,  a  condition  that 
exists  on  nearly  every  route  in  greater  or  less  degree. 

The  Atchison,  Topeka  &  Santa  Fe,  Kansas  City  to  La 
Junta,  westbound,  baggage  service,  3,964,000  "car-foot 
miles;  eastbound,  5,708,000  car-foot  miles;  a  difference 
of  1,743,  000  car-foot  miles. 

Express  service,  westbound.  4,600,000  car-foot  miles; 
eastbound,  5,500,000  car-foot  miles;  a  difference  of  880.000 
and  odd  car-foot  miles. 

Route  176537,  Ash  Fork  to  Los  Angeles,  2,238,000  car- 
foot  miles  westbound;  2,543,000  car-foot  miles  east- 
bound 

Question  (by  Mr.  Stewart).  That  is  baggage  ? 

Answer.  Baggage.  A  difference  of  305,000  car-foot 
miles. 

Express,  westbound,  2,061,000  car-foot  miles;  east- 
bound,  1,383,000  car-foot  miles;  a  difference  of  678,000 
car-foot  miles. 

Ash  Fork  and  Albuquerque,  route  160504.  baggage, 
westbound.  1,412,000  car-foot  miles;  eastbound,  2,136,000 
car-foot  miles;  a  difference  of  724,000  car-foot  miles. 

Express  service,  Avestbound,  1,151,000  car-foot  miles; 
eastbound,  944.000  car-foot  miles,  a  difference  of  270.000 
car-foot  miles. 


370 

Bear  in  mind  that  in  every  one  of  these  cases  there  is  a  large 
amount  of  space  in  the  unoccupied  column,  column  £5,  i7i 
■which  the  mails  have  participated  on  a  basis  u)hich  includes 
all  of  the  unauthorized  and  i/nnsed  space  claims  of  the  rail- 
roads, and  which  is  overloaded  by  reason  of  the  fact  that  no 
such  operations  in  connection  witli  the  other  three  services 
were  made*  Not  only  was  the  unoccupied  space  increased 
by  reason  of  the  equahzing  claims  not  being  made  in  those 
services,  but  the  per  cent  thcre})y  in  those  three  services 
was  decreased  and  the  per  cent  of  the  mail  increased  by 
adding  to  the  mail  all  of  this  unauthorized  and  unused  space. 

Question  (by  Mr.  Stewart).  For  the  purpose  of  balanc- 
ing the  mails  ? 

Answer.  Yes. 

Baltimore  &  Ohio,  route  113512,  Washington  and  Graf- 
ton : 

Miscellaneous  service,  westbound,  242,000  car-foot  miles : 
eastbound,  152,000  car-foot  miles;  a  difference  of  90,000 
car-foot  miles. 

Baggage,  westbound,  638,000  car-foot  miles;  eastbound, 
603,000  car-foot  miles;  a  difference  of  35,000  car-foot 
miles. 

Express.  1,326,000  car-foot  miles  westbound  and  936,000 
car-foot  miles  eastboimd,  or  a  difference  of  389,000  car- 
foot  miles. 

That  is  located  in  the  eastern  section.  Similar  figures 
shown  on  other  routes  of  that  company. 

The  Boston  &  Albany,  route  1045i3,  baggage  service, 
eastbound,  1,542,000  car-foot  miles;  westbound,  1,342,000 
car-foot  miles;  a  difference  of  200,000  car-foot  miles. 

Miscellaneous,  eastbound,  429,000  car-foot  miles;  west- 
bound, 603,000  car-foot  miles;  a  difference  of  174,000  car- 
foot  miles. 

Express,  838,000  car-foot  miles  eastbound,  462,000  car- 
foot  miles  westboimd,  or  a  difference  of  375,000  car-foot 
miles. 

The  unoccupied  space  in  this  route,  by  the  way,  was 
1,834,000  car-loot  miles  eastbound  and  2,060,000  c'ar-foot 
miles  westbound. 

On  the  Rock  Island,  Oklahoma  City  &  Mangum,  bag- 
gage, westbound,  194,000  car-foot  miles;  eastbound, 
186,000  car-foot  miles;  8,000  car-foot  miles  difference. 

Express  service,  westbound,  377,000  car-foot  miles; 
eastbound,  311,000  car-foot  miles;  a  difference  of  66,000 
car-foot  miles. 

*  Italics  are  the  Department's. 


I 


I 


371 

The  Big  Four,  route  133531,  Kankakee  Junction  to  Cin- 
cinnati, baggage,  eastbound,  705,000  car-foot  miles;  west- 
bound, 947.000  car-foot  miles;  a  difference  of  242.000  (R. 
162,000  sic.)  car-foot  miles. 

Miscellaneous  service,  eastbomid,  365,000  car-foot  miles; 
westboimd,  378,000  car-foot  miles;  a  difference  of  13,000 
car-foot  miles. 

Express,  east])ound,  906,000  car-foot  miles;  westbound, 
788,000  car-foot  miles;  a  difference  of  118,000  car-foot 
miles. 

Other  routes  of  that  company  show  similar  results. 

The  Chicago  &  Xorthwestern,  Des  Moines  to  Sioux  City, 
route  143549,  baggage  service,  even  trams,  336,000  car-foot 
miles;  odd  trains,  101,000  car-foot  miles;  difference, '235, 000 
car-foot  miles. 

Miscellaneous,  even  trains,  nothing;  odd  trains,  42,000 
car-foot  miles;  difference,  42,000  car-foot  miles. 

Express  service,  even  trains,  90,000  car-foot  miles;  odd 
trains,  232,000  car-foot  miles;  difference,  142,000  car-foot 
miles. 

Chicago  &  Omaha,  a  large  route,  eastbound  trains 
charged  in  the  baggage  service  with  6,329,000  car-foot 
miles;  westbound,  3,357,000  car-foot  miles;  a  difference  of 
2,971,000  car-foot  miles. 

In  the  miscellaneous  service,  68,000  car-foot  miles 
charged  eastbound  and  96,000  westboimd;  a  difference  of 
28,000  car-foot  miles. 

In  the  express,  eastbound,  1,068,000  car-foot  miles; 
westbound,  1,566,000  car-foot  miles;  a  difference  of  497,000 
car-foot  miles. 

On  the  Norfolk  &  Western,  route  157526,  baggage  serv- 
ice, even  trains,  294,000  car-foot  miles;  odd  trains,  308,000 
car-foot  miles;  a  difference  of  14,000  car-foot  miles. 

Miscellaneous,  even  trains,  nothing;  odd  trains,  104,400 
car-foot  miles. 

Express  service,  even  trains,  601,000  car-foot  miles; 
odd  trains,  461,000  car-foot  miles;  a  difference  of  140,000 
car-foot  miles. 

The  Delaware  &  Hudson,  route  107555,  between  Albany 
and  Binghamton.  In  this  case  baggage  service  is  approxi- 
mately balanced,  but  there  is  a  difference  of  23,000  between 
the  outward  and  the  inward  movement  in  the  miscellaneous 
service  and  of  375,500  car-foot  miles  in  the  express  service. 

The  Denver  &  Rio  Grande,  route  169507,  Grand  Junc- 
tion to  Ogden. 

Westbound,  baggage,  311,000  car-foot  miles;  east- 
bound,  490,000  car-foot  miles;  a  difference  of  179,000  car- 
foot  miles. 


372 

Express  service,  westbound,  675,000  car-foot  miles; 
eastbound,  221,000  car-foot  miles;  a  difference. of  453,000 
car-foot  miles. 

Montrose  to  Grand  Junction,  route  165509,  baggage, 
westbound,  19,000  car-foot  miles;  eastbound,  57,000  car- 
foot  miles;  a  difference  of  38,000  car-foot  miles. 

Express,  westbound,  33,000  car-foot  miles;  42,000  car- 
foot  miles  eastbound;  a  difference  of  9,000  car-foot  miles. 

The  Great  Northern  Railroad,  Williston  to  East  Scobey, 
route  163506,  odd  trains,  in  the  baggage,  61,000  car-foot 
miles;  even  trains,  37,000  car-foot  miles;  a  difference  of 
24,000  car-foot  miles. 

Express  service,  odd  trains,  71,000  car-foot  miles;  even 
trains,-  37,000  car-foot  miles;  a  difference  of  34,000  car- 
foot  miles. 

I  have  not  made  the  computations  on  all  of  these  cases, 
but  practically  every  route  shows  the  same  situation  on 
the  Great  Northern  to  a  greater  or  less  degree. 

The  Lehigh  Valley,  Penn  Haven  Junction  &  Mount 
Carmel,  route  110584,  baggage,  outward  trains,  20,000 
car-foot  miles;  mward  trains,  107,000  car-foot  miles;  a 
difference  of  87,000  car-foot  miles. 

Miscellaneous  service,  13,000  car-foot  miles  outward; 
16,000  car-foot  miles  inward;  a  difference  of  3,000  car- 
foot  miles. 

Express  service,  103,000  car-foot  miles  outward;  62,000 
car-foot  miles  inward;  a  difference  of  41,000  car-foot 
miles. 

On  a  heavy  route  on  the  Lehigh  Valley,  Jersey  City  & 
Buffalo,  107591,  we  find  1,923,000  car-foot  miles  charged 
to  the  baggage  in  even  trains  and  2,487,000  car-foot  miles 
in  odd  trains,  a  difference  of  563,000  car-foot  miles. 

Miscellaneous  service,  285,000  car-foot  miles  in  even 
trains  and  497,000  car-foot  miles  in  odd  trains,  a  difference 
of  211,000  car-foot  miles. 

In  the  express  the  difference  is  not  quite  so  marked. 
The  even  trains  are  charged  with  877,000  car-foot  miles 
and  the  odd  trains  with  909,000  car-foot  miles,  a  differ- 
ence of  32,000  car-foot  miles. 

I  also  read  from  route  110586,  White  Haven  to  Bear 
Creek,  a  small  route.  On  this  route  there  are  330  car-foot 
miles  charged  to  the  baggage  service,  and  306  to  express 
service  on  odd  trams,  and  nothing  in  the  return. 

Missouri  Pacific,  Kansas  City-Coffeyville,  westbound, 
baggage,  289,000  car-foot  miles;  eastbound,  229,000  car- 
foot  miles;  a  difference  of  60,000  car-foot  miles. 


In  the  miscellaneous,  41,000  car-foot  miles  westbound, 
47,000  car-foot  miles  eastbound,  a  difference  of  6,000  car- 
foot    miles. 

In  the  express,  662,000  car-foot  miles  westbound, 
519,000  car-foot  miles  eastbound;  a  difference  of  142,000 
car-foot  miles. 

On  a  small  route,  Jefferson  City  to  Bagnell,  baggage, 
westbound,  4,365;  eastbound,  2,700;  a  difference  of  1,665. 

Express  service,  westbound,  6,000  car-foot  miles;  east- 
bound,  1,000  car-foot  miles;  a  difference  of  5,000  car-foot 
miles. 

Atchison  &  Stockton,  route  155562,  baggage  service, 
westbound,  291,000  car-foot  miles;  eastbound,  249,000 
car-foot  miles;  difference  42,000  car-foot  miles. 

Miscellaneous  service,  westbound,  202,000  car-foot 
miles;  with  but  44,000  charged  in  the  return  direction,  a 
difference  of  158,000  car-foot  miles. 

Express  service,  westbound,  490,000  car-foot  miles; 
eastbound,  597,000  car-foot  miles;  a  difference  of  107,000 
car-foot  miles. 

*  *  *  *  *     • 

Attorney  Examiner  Brown.  It  seems  to  me  that  that 
is  representative.  I  don't  know  why  you  should  go  any 
fm-ther  into  that. 

Ml-.  Stewart.  I  would  be  glad  to  file  an  abstract  of 
the  rest  of  those  cases  if  you  desire.  There  are  more 
representative  cases  in  that  file. 

Attorney  Examiner  Brown.  I  assume  that  those  are 
ilhistrative  of  the  situation. 

The  Witness.  They  are  taken  from  the  actual  reports. 

I  think  I  have  stated  enough  cases  to  prove  that  the 
preponderance  of  movement  in  one  direction  is  typical  in 
all  sections  of  the  country.  The  condition  is  a  natural  result 
of  the  flow  of  traffic  from  the  business  centers  and  is  true  in 
the  same  general  way  with  the  mails.      (R.  3879-3889.) 

KECAPITULATION   OF    ALL   UNBALANCED   MOVEMENTS 

IN    PASSENGER    AND    EXPRESS     SERVICES    OF    NO 

VALUE;    EACH    ROUTE    MUST    BE    CONSIDERED    BY 

ITSELF. 

Mr.  McBride  testified  on  cross-examination  as  follows: 

Question  (by  Mr.  Wood).  Nov/  this  unoccupied  space — 

the  question  of  the  balanced  movement   of  express    and 

baggage  as  related  to  the  movement  of  mail.     You  read 

a  lot  of  figures  on  a  lot  of  (Ufferent  routes.     Did  you  make 

any  recapitulation  of  all  of  tliose  cases  for  the  purpose  of 

determining  whether  when  you  added  them  up  all  together 

it  would  show  a  bahmced  or  an  unbalanced  movement? 


3T4 

Answer.  I  have  not. 

Question.  You  dealt  with  certain  intUvidual  routes. 
Did  you  make  a  recapitulation  on  the  situation  on  any 
individual  railroad  as  a  whole  ? 

Answer.  I  think  I  did  make  a  recapitulation  of  the 
Illinois  Central.  I  think  I  referred  to  that  in  my  testi- 
mony. 

Question.  Let  us  have  it. 

Answer.  I    did    make    such    a    recapitulation    for     the 
express  only  on  the  Illhiois  Central. 
Question.  For  all  routes  ? 

Answ-er.  Yes,  sir,  for  all  routes.  It  shows  the  differ- 
ence-   ,,,.-,        1  1 

Question  (interrupting).  No;  I  would  like  the  totals, 
nlease. 

Answ^er.  Well,  I  only  totaled  the  differences,   Mi\  Wood. 
Question.  Well,  that  does  not  show  me  anything. 
AnsAver.  The   differences   total   as   I  stated. 
Question.  No;  I  don't  want  that,  because  that  does  not 
establish   anything   to   my   mind   at   all.     You  have   not 
totaled  the  movement  in  each  direction  for  any  individual 
railroad  or  for  all  of  those  cases  that  you  gave,  put  to- 
gether, or  for  the  country  as  a  whole? 

Answer.  No,  sir;  that  has  not  been  done,  but  it  could 
be  done. 

Question.  And  you  don't  know  whether  if  you  totaled 
those  cases  it  w^oiild  show  that  the  sum  and  substance  of 
all  this  resulted  in  a  balanced  movement  as  a  wdiole  or  an 
unbalanced  movement  as  a  whole  ? 

Answer.  I  don't  think  that  is  germane  to  the  point  I 
am  making. 

Question.  Possibly  not  to  your  mind.  It  must  have 
some  relation  to  it,  I  imagine. 

Answer.  You  have  got  to  take  the  direct  route  that  we 
are  considering  and  not  the  service  as  a  whole. 

Question.  We  are  considering  this  in  the  light  of  its  effect 
on  the  distribution  of  space  as  a  whole,  are  we  not,  in  the 
country  as  a  whole  ? 

Answer.  We  are,  and  if  these  different  balances  were  made 
on  each  individual  road  it  would  have  a  very  different  effect 
than  as  though  you  added  up  all  the  totals  in  each  direction 
for  the  country  as  a  whole,  because  on  some  roads  the  pre- 
ponderance might  be  in  another  direction  from  another 
road.  It  seems  to  me  my  point  is  entirely  based  upon  the 
individual  situations  and  upon  the  hypothesis  which  in- 
volves the  same  action  with  express,  baggage,  and  miscel- 
laneous that  was  taken  with  the  mail  space. 


k 


875 

Qu.es tion.  You  have  not  made  any  effort  on  any  indi- 
vidual railroad  or  in  those  cases  as  a  whole  to  determine 
what  the  final  result  is  ? 

Answer.  I  have  not,  because  I  only  brought  this  uj)  to 
show  the  effect  of  failure  to  make  such  a  balanced  move- 
ment as  on  individual  routes. 

Question.  Well,  you  brought  it  up  for  the  purpose  of  pick- 
ing out  certain  cases,  certain  routes  on  which  there  was  an 
unbalanced  movement,  but  you  made  absolutely  no  effort 
to  find  out  whether  as  a  whole  the  movement  was  balanced 
or  unbalanced '( 

Answer.  I  didn't  think  it  was  germane. 

Question  (bv  Mr.  Stew^akt).  It  did  not  have  the  slightest 
relevancv  to  the  subject  ? 

Answer.  Xo:  it  had  no  relevancy.     (R.  3927-3930.) 

FAILURE  TO  EQUALIZE  SPACE  IN  PASSENGER  AND  EX- 
PRESS SERVICES  ACCOUNTS  LARGELY  FOR  THE 
DIFFERENCE  IN  PERCENTAGE  CHARGE  TO  MAILS 
BY  RAILROADS  AND  POST  OFFICE  DEPARTMENT. 

Mr.  McBride  testified  on  du-ect  examination  as  follows: 

Question  (by  Attorney  Examiner  Brown).  Wliat  is  your 
figure  there  as  compared  with  that  of  the  railroads  ( 

Answer.  The  participation  in  all  the  services  ? 

Question.  Yes.  if  you  remember. 

Answer.  Our  ratio  was  6.97  instead  of  9.138. 

Question.  Between  that  6.97  and  the  9  is  contamed  all 
these  things  with  which  ,you  have  been  dealing,  I  take  it  ( 

Answer.  We  claim  that  this  sort  of  space  of  which  I  have 
been  talking  accounts  for  that  difference  largelv.  (R. 
3892.) 

RAILROAD  PLAN  OF  HANDLING  UNOCCUPIED  SPACE 
OVERLOADED  IT  BY  INCLUD  [NG  SPACE  THAT  SHOULD 
RIGHTLY  HAVE  BEEN  CH.^RGED  TO  BAGGAGE,  MIS- 
CELLANEOUS, AND  EXPRESS  SERVICES,  GREATLY 
INCREASING  THE  CHARGES  TO  MAIL  SERVICE. 

Mr.  McBhide  testified  on  direct  examination  as  follows: 
This  being  the  case,  the  theory  of  the  raih'oads'  plan  of 
handling  the  unused  space  and  computing  the  ])articipation 
of  the  several  services  in  the  unoccu))ied  s])ace,  first,  over- 
loads the  unoccu])icd  space  by  inchiding  therein  a  large 
amount  of  car-foot  miles  that  rightly  should  bo  cliarged  to 
the  baggage,  mis;ellaneous,  and  express  services,  to  j)hice 
them  on  a  parity  with  the  mail  service.  This  results  from 
failure  to  equalize  the  movement  in  the-e  services  in  the 
return  direction,  as  was  done  with  thi'  mail  sci'vice. 


376 

Let  us  take  route  143507  on  the  Illinois  Central.  The 
westbound  l)aggage  is  reported  to  have  utilized  942,445 
car-foot  inilesT  and  eastl)ound  761,045  car-foot  miles,  a 
difference  of  181,400  car-foot  miles. 

In  the  exi)ress,  1,815,020  car-foot  miles  in  the  westbound 
niovcMuent  and  1,872,895  car-foot  miles  in  the  return,  a 
difference  of  442.125  car-foot  miles. 

The  unoccupied  space  as  reported  in  column  25  of  Form 
3  is  2,339,413  car-foot  miles,  and  eastbound  is  3,165,017 
car-foot  miles,  a  difference  of  825,604  car-foot  miles.  Had 
the  baggage  and  express  movements  been  equalized  or  ap- 
])roximately  equalized  it  would  have  reduced  the  amount  of 
u!ioccu])ied  space  in  this  route  over  600,000  car-foot  miles, 
in  all  of  which,  under  the  railroads'  plan,  the  mails  partici- 
pated on  a  })asis  first  loaded  up  with  all  the  equalizing  space 
that  was  claimed  in  connection  therewith  and  which  was 
not  claimed  in  connection  with  the  other  services.  By 
reason  of  this  inequality  in  the  movements  of  baggage,  mis- 
cellaneous, and  express  on  the  Illinois  Central  system, 
2,810,000  car-foot  miles  were  inckuled  in  unoccupied  space 
in  column  25  of  Form  No.  3,  the  total  of  this  column  for  the 
svstcm  being  31,749,000,  in  which  the  mails  participated  on 
an  inflated  basis,  which,  had  the  movements  been  equalized 
in  ])aggage,  miscellaneous,  and  express,  as  was  done  in  the 
case  of  the  mail,  v.'0uld  have  been  charged  direct  to  the 
proper  service  and  which  would  have  reduced  accordingly 
the  mail  charge. 

The  result  of  the  railroads'  method  is,  of  course,  to 
greatly  increase  the  car-foot  miles  charged  to  the  mails; 
that  part  that  ])articularly  is  represented  in  the  aj)])ortioned 
part  of  the  unoccupied  s]5ace. 

Question  (by  Attorney  Examiner  Bkown).  Have  you 
estimated  in  a  general  way  how  much  that  amounts  to  in 
total  '(■ 

Answer.  Why^  I  have  not,  Mr.  Examiner.  But  it  works 
two  ways.  It  not  only  does  that  to  the  mail,  but  it  de- 
creases the  car-foot  miles  taken  from  this  unoccupied  space 
that  is  charged  to  the  baggage  and  miscellaneous  and  ex- 
press.     (R.  3889-3891.) 


377 

THE  DEPARTMENT'S  ASSIGNMENT  OF  UNAUTHORIZED  AND 
UNUSED  SPACE  REPORTED  BY  THE  RAILROADS  IN  CON- 
NECTION WITH  THE  MAILS,  AND  ALL  APPORTIONMENTS 
OF  THE  UNOCCUPIED  SPACE  IN  MIXED  CARS. 
(See  the  full  explanation  of  the  treatment  of  these  elements  as  described  in  Post  Office 

Department  Exhibit  No.  65.) 
DEPARTMENT'S  ASSIGNMENT  OF  UNAUTHORIZED  AND 
UNUSED   SPACE  REPORTED  BY  THE  RAILROADS  IN 
CONNECTION  WITH  THE  MAILS. 

Ill  c'oniKH'tioii  with  full  niid  apartment  cars,  Mr.  McBiiide 
testified,  on  cross-exa  rination,  as  follows: 

Question  (by  Mr.  Wood).  Now^  verv  briefly,  plan  1  does 
what? 

Answer.  It  assigns  all  space  other  than  that  authorized, 
to  the  passenger  service. 

Question.  That  is  to  say,  if  the  consist  of  a  train  is 
made  up  sufficient  to  take  care  of  the  passenger  and 
express  business,  and  a  30-foot  apart  n.ent  car  is  author- 
izefl  for  use  in  that  train  and  the  railroad  company  has 
a  30-foot  apart'nent  car  which  it  puts  into  that  train,  so 
that  it  con"*'or"-.s  to  the  authorization,  the  other  end  of 
that  60-foot  car  consisting  of  a  baggage  end,  for  which 
the  railroad  co  vpany  has  no  use,  and  which  it  does  not 
use,  you  assign  the  30  feet  actual  authorized  in  the  apart- 
ment ear  to  the  .nail,  })ut  you  assign  the  conpany  30  feet 
carried  by  the  railroad  <'ompany  on  account  of  the  apart- 
ment car  authorization  not  otherwise  used  to  the  passen- 
ger service  ? 

Answer.   That  is  true,  under  plan  No.  1. 

Question.    That  is  what  you  would  do  under  plan  No.  1? 

Answer.  Yes,  sir. 

Question.    Now,  what  do  you  do  under  plan  No.  2  ? 

Answer.  Plan  No.  2  is  fullv  described  under  Exhibit 
No.  6o. 

Question.  We  will  take  that  particular  case  that  I 
described.  What  would  you  do  under  plan  No.  2  in  that 
particular  case  ( 

Answer,  Under  plan  No.  2  in  that  particular  case  that 
excess  space  would  be  chargcul  to  the  passenger  service. 

Question.  Charged  exclusively  to  passenger  service 
under  either  plan  No.  I    — 

Answer.   Tliat  particular  case. 

Question  (continuing).   Or  plan  No.  2? 

Answer.    Yes.     (11.  436-43S.) 


L 


8ta 

(A^  ASSIGNMENT  CORRECT  BECAUSE  THE  MAIL  SERVICE 
SHOULD  NOT  BE  PENALIZED  FOR  UNECONOMICAL 
RAILROAD  OPERATION,  NOR  SHOULD  A  RATE  BE 
PREDICATED  UPON  IT. 

Mr.  McBride  testified  on  cross-examination,,  as  follows: 

Question  (by  Mr.  Wood).   Do  you  think  that  is  right? 

Answer.  I  do,  for  this  reason,  that  the  mail  service 
should  not  be  penalized  for  uneconomical  operation  of 
equipn  ent. 

Question.  Wherein  is  thei-e  an  uneconoinical  operation 
of  equip nient  where,  with  a  train  whose  consist  is  such 
that  it  takes  care  of  the  rcDiaining  classes  of  trafhc  and 
the  3()-foot  apartirent  car  re([uires  the  haulins:  of  a  60-foot 


car 


Answer.  This  ascertain irent  is  for  the  purpose  of  fixing 
a  rate  for  authorized  service.  It  see^iis  to  me,  in  ascer- 
taining a  basis  for  this  rate,  we  should  take  into  considera- 
tion the  used  space.  It  does  not  seem  to  me  that  it  would 
be  fair  to  include  in  the  car-foot  nnles  forming  such  a  basis 
any  service  outside  of  the  regularlv  used  service,  on  plan 
No.  2.     (K.  438.) 

Question.  Now%  supposing,  with  the  train  made  up  and 
with  the  train  filled,  there  are  a  number  of  additional 
passengers  to  be  taken  care  of,  we  will  say  30  in  number, 
occupying  half  of  a  passenger  car,  with  the  other  half 
vacant,  and  you  are  required  to  put  an  additional  passenger 
car  on  the  train  to  take  care  of  that  half  load  of  passengers. 
Where  would  you  assign  that  30  feet  ? 

Answ^er.  If  such  a  case  were  reported  on  these  forms,  it 
would  be  assigned  to  passenger  service. 

Question.  Well,  that  is  assigned  to  passenger  service,  is 
it  not  ? 

Answer.  I  presume  it  is. 

Question.  The  w^aste  space  in  an  additional  car  exclu- 
sively devoted  to  passenger  is  under  this  plan  charged  to 
passenger,  and  the  waste  space  in  the  additional  car 
required  for  use  on  the  train  aU  of  which,  so  far  as  used,  is 
used  for  the  mail  is  also  charged  to  passenger  ? 

Answer.  If  that  is  a  matter  entirely  within  the  railroad's 
control,  that  would  be  the  case. 

Question.  Noav,  will  you  tell  me  how,  under  the  case  I 
have  put,  the  railroad  company  is  going  to  avoid  hauling 
that  30  feet  of  excess  space  in  that  car,  in  order  to  fulfill 
the  authorization  of  the  mail  for  you  ? 

Mr.  Stewakt.  One  moment.  I  object  to  the  question, 
and  1  did  not  to  others,  because  I  supposed  that  there  would 
be  an  end  of  them  pretty  soon,  upon  the  ground  that  it  is 


I 


379 

purely  hypothetical,  and  it  is  not  shown  that  any  one  of 
these  examples  is  included  in  this  tabulation. 

Question  (by  Mr.  Wood).  Will  you  be  good  enough  to 
read  class  K  on  Exhibit  Xo.  47  ? 

Answer.  "A  lo-foot  or  a  30-foot  apartment  in  combina- 
tion car  or  unit  of  mail  storage  space  was  authorized;  but 
the  railroad  company,  for  its  own  convenience,  furnished 
and  operated  in  fulfillment  of  such  apartment  authoriza- 
tion a  full  railway  post-office  car  or  storage  car,  baggage 
car,  or  combination  car  and  reported  and  entered  on 
Form  4  the  mileage  for  the  excess  space,  the  difference 
between  the  apartment  or  mail  storage  space  authorization 
and  the  length  of  the  car  furnished  for  the  distance 
authorized. 

"This  excess  car-foot  mileage  is  entered  in  column  12, 
Form  4,  when  furnished  in  connection  with  an  apartment 
car,  and  in  column  23,  Form  4,  when  furnished  in  connec- 
tion with  a  storage-space  unit,  transcribed  to  column  25b, 
Form  3,  and  is  included  in  column  21,  Form  301. 

"This  excess  car-foot  mileage  is  classified  under  symbol 
'k'  hereinafter." 

Question.  Now,  that  all  gets  back  to  a  previous  exhibit 
of  the  Post  Office  Department,  which  is  based  upon  the 
statistical  study  and  the  instructions  that  were  ^iven  for 
the  gathering  of  the  information  in  the  field,  does  it  not  ? 

Answer.  Yes,  sir. 

Question.  And  the  space  that  is  undertaken  to  be  de- 
scribed in  this  subdivision  ''K"  is  space  which  the  carriers 
were  instructed,  under  those  instructions  which  were  given, 
to  report  in  those  cases,  where  they  had  no  use  for  the 
additional  space  in  that  car  and  were  requh-ed  to  haul  it 
in  order  to  fulfill  the  authorization  of  the  Post  Office 
Department;  is  that  right? 

Answer.  That  space  reported  in  column  25b,  Form  3, 
which  the  railroads  reported  as  being  necessary  to  run, 
was  stated  in  cases  of  that  kind,  indicating  that  in  a 
great  man}'  cases  there  was  ample  space  in  another  car 
running  on  the  train.  We  could  not  concede  that  it  was 
necessary  to  run  that  additional  car.  That  was  the  point 
of  difference  between  us.     (R.  439-442.) 

Question.  And  do  1  understand  you  to  say  that  you  have 
analyzed  all  of  those  cases  and  have  founH  that  in  every 
one  of  those  cases,  in  the  judgment  of  the  Post  Ofiice 
Department,  there  could  have  been  some  shift  made  in 
the  consist  of  the  train  so  as  to  avoid  the  hauling  of  that 
30  feet  of  excess  space  ? 

Answer.  I  do  not  say  that  that  is  true  in  every  case. 

Question.  But  you  have 


380 

Answer.  We  have  found  cases  which,  in  our  judgment, 
could  have  been  obviated  by  a  different  method  of  opera- 
tion. 

***** 

Question.  What  was  it  based  on  ? 

Answer.  On  the  general  proposition  that  I  stated  before, 
that  in  an  ascertainment  of  this  kind  it  seemed  to  us  that 
we  should  base  the  ascertainment  of  space  upon  the  used 
space.     (R.  443,  444.) 

(B)  IN  CONNECTION  WITH  THE  MIXED  CARS. 

Mr.  McBridk  testified  on  cross-examination  as  follows: 
Question  (by  Mr.  Wood).  Now,  there  are  other  cases 
here  on  this  sheet  in  which  you,  instead  of  charging  the 
excess  over  the  used  space  to  the  passenger,  you  propose 
to  apportion  it  between  the  passenger,  the  mail,  and 
the  express  ? 

Answer.  There  is  a  difference  there  between  mixed  cars 
and  postal  cars.  Under  our  plan  No.  2,  we  do  participate 
(R,  "proceed"  sic.)  on  a  percentage  basis  in  the  unauthor- 
ized and  unused  space  in  mixed  cars,  based  upon  the  used 
space  in  each  of  the  services.      (R.  444.) 

(C)  REASONS  FOR  THE  DIFFERENCE  IN  TREATMENT  OF 
CLAIMS  IN  CONNECTION  WiTH  FULL  POSTAL  CARS 
AND  MIXED  CARS. 

Mr.  McBride  testified  on  cross-examination  as  follows: 
Question  (by  Mr.  Wood).  Well,  what  is  the  principle 
upon  which  you  determine  on  Exhibit  No.  48  whether  the 
space  should  be  apportioned  to  passenger  entirely  or 
whether  it  is  a  case  where  there  may  fairly  be  an  apportion- 
ment as  between  the  passenger,  mail,  and  express  ( 

Answer.  Because  in  the  case  of  postal  cars  and  apart- 
ment cars  they  are  specific  units  which  are  authorized  in 
advance,  and  "tlie  railroad  company  is  able  to  arrange  for 
their  operation,  and  it  does  not  encroach  upon  the  remain- 
der of  the  car.  Those  cars  carry  their  o^^^l  unused  space. 
In  the  case  of  space  in  a  baggage  car,  a  certain  amount  of 
unused  space  is  necessary  to  transact  the  business  in  the 
mixed  car.  We  believe  that  the  mail  service  should 
participate  in  that,  and  that  is  the  theory  of  plan  2,  of 
participation  in  the  baggage  end  of  mixed  or  combination 
cars.     (R.  445.) 

(D)  TJNTJSED  SPACE  IN  CONNECTION  WITH  STORAGE 
SPACE   WAS   APPORTIONED. 

Mr.  McBuiDE  testified  on  cross-examination  as  follows: 
Question  (by  Mr.  Wood).     Now,   suppose  you  look  at 

subdivision  "  B "  a  minute  and  tell  me  what  you  do  with 

"B"  on  your  plan  No.  2. 


381 

Answer.  "B"  classification  consists  of- — — 

Question.  Well,  what  do  you  do  with  classification 
"B"  ?  Do  you  assign  that  to  passenger  exclusively,  or  do 
you  apportion  it? 

Answer.  I  was  going  to  state  that  a  part  of  it  was 
assigned  to  passenger,  in  connection  with  full  cars  or 
apartment  cars,  and  that  in  connection  with  storage  units, 
the  storage  space  or  closed-pouch  space  was  divided  on  the 
basis  of  the  unused  space  in  mixed  cars. 

Question.     Where  do  you  find  that? 

Answer.  That  was  made  up  for  individual  roads.  It 
was  not  assigned  to  the  total.  Each  road  was  treated  separ- 
ately in  connection  with  the  formula  of  Exhibit  65. 

Question.  Column  B  includes  full  railway  post-office 
cars,  does  it  not? 

Answer.  It  includes  some  operation  on  days  not  author- 
ized. 

Question.  It  includes  the  excess  use,  the  unauthorized 
use,  of  the  railway  post-office  car? 

Answer.  On  days  when  not  authorized. 

Question.  And  it  includes  the  unauthorized  and  excess 
use  of  an  apartment  car? 

Answer.  On  days  not  authorized. 

Question.  And  of  a  full  storage  car? 

Answer,  On  days  not  authorized;  yes,  sir. 

Question.  And  you  put  that  in  with  similar  excess  of 
the  mixed  cars,  and  propose  to  apportion  all  the  space 
contained  in  Column  B  among  the  passenger,  mail,  and 
express  ? 

Answer.  You  mistake  me.  Space  classified  as  "B"  on 
Form  No.  2  and  Form  No.  4,  as  relates  to  apartment  cars, 
is  charged  to  passenger  service.  The  remainder  of  it  is 
apportioned.  Is  that  clear?  Understand,  Mr.  Wood, 
apportionment  was  not  made  on  Exhibit  No.  48  as  a 
wdiole.  Each  road  was  apportioned  separately.  (R.  446, 
447.) 

(B)  ASSIGNMENT  OF  SPACE  TO  PASSENGER  SERVICE 
WHERE  APARTMENT  CAR  IS  RUN  BY  RAILROAD  ON 
DAYS  NOT  AUTHORIZED  EOR  CARRYING  MAILS. 

Mr,  McBride  testified  on  cross-examination  as  follows: 

Question  (by  Mr.  Wood).  And  where  there  was  an 
autiiorization  of  six  days  a  week  in  a  baggage  car,  but  no 
authorization  on  the  seventh  day,  you  have  assigned  the 
amount  of  the  authorization  for  the  six  days  as  unused 
space  to  be  apportioned  between  the  passenger,  mail,  and 
express  ? 


382 

Answer.  For  the  Sunda.y  movement,  T  take  it  you  mean  i 

Question.  Yes. 

Answer.  Yes,  sir:  that  is  true. 

Question.  But  if,  instead  of  a  six-day  authorization  of 
space  in  a  baggage  car  the  six-day  authorization  had  been 
for  a  mail  apartment  cai",  which  might  consist  of  a  mail  car 
devoted  to  the  mail  with  a  baggage  end,  in  which  the  bag- 
gage and  express  were  carried,  and  which  constituted  the 
regular  consist  of  that  train,  running  seven  days  in  the 
week,  you  assign  that,  and  the  authorization  is  made  on  the 
space  authorized  in  that  mail  car  exclusively  to  the  pas- 
senger ? 

Answer.  Yes,  sir. 

Question.  Now,  what  is  the  justification  for  the  tliffer- 
ence  of  treatment? 

Answer.  I  don't  know  that  I  have  to  justify  that.  That 
is  in  accordance  with  the  plan  that  we  adopted  for  the 
treatment  of  these  different  classes  of  space. 

Question.  Now,  let  us  see  about  that  for  a  minute.  That 
would  cover  a  case  of  this  kind,  would  it  not:  You  had  a 
train  that  ran  every  day,  that  consisted  of  a  coach  or  two,' 
exclusive  passenger  equipment,  and  a  combination  car, 
consisting  of  a  mail  and  apartment  car,  on  the  baggage  end, 
which  is  the  regular  consist  of  that  train,  and  it  runs  every 
day.  Now,  on  six  days  of  the  week  there  is  an  authoriza- 
tion for  the  mail,  and  on  the  seventh  day  there  is  none. 
Are  you  going  to  change  the  consist  of  that  train  on  the 
seventh  day  ? 

Answer.  That  is  frequently  done. 

Question.  How  frequently  ? 

Answer.  I  think  that  is  done  on  many,  many  roads. 

Question.  What  would  you  put  in  in  place  of  that  com- 
bination car  with  the  mail  apartment  and  the  baggage  end  ? 

Answer.  Well,  I  don't  know  that  that  is  any  particular 
concern  of  the  Post  Office  Department,  what  kind  of  a  car 
they  put  in.  I  know  that  we  do  not  need  the  car  on  Sun- 
day, and  I  do  not  see  any  reason  wh}"  we  should  be  charged 
for  it.     (R.  448-450.) 

And  again: 

Question.  Now,  that  being  the  consist  necessary  to  take 
care  of  the  regular  business  of  that  train,  I  would  like  to 
have  you  tell  me  how  the  railroad  compan}^  is  going  to 
avoid  hauling  that  apartment  car  on  the  seventh  day  of 
the  week.  *  *  *  to  take  care  of  the  rest  of  that 
business. 

Answer.  It  may  not  be  able  to  avoid  the  hauling  of  that 
car,  but  that  does  not  have  any  bearing  upon  the  purposes 


of  this  apportionment  of  mail  space,  it  seems  to  me.  We 
are  endeavoring  to  get  a  fair  approximation  of  the  amount 
of  mail  space  that  is  to  be  charged  to  the  mail  service. 
(R.  451,  452.) 

(F)  CONTENTION  OF  DEPARTMENT  THAT  IT  IS  NOT 
NECESSARY  TO  RUN  APARTMENT  CARS  ON  DAYS 
NOT  AUTHORIZED. 

Mr.  McBride  testified  on  direct  examination  as  follows: 

Question  (by  Attorney"  Examiner  Brown).  Now,  right 
at  that  point,  we  might  clear  up  a  thing  that  I  have  in  mind. 
Where  the  department  has  not  required  the  carrier  to  run 
their  mail  car,  or  distribute  the  mail,  or  carry  the  mail  on 
Sunday,  why  is  it  necessary  for  the  carrier  to  have  that 
particular  car  in  the  train  ? 

Answer.  It  is  not  for  our  purposes. 

Question.  That  is  your  contention,  that  it  is  not  ? 

Answer.  Yes,  sir. 

Question.  And  it  is  the  contention  of  the  carriers  that  it 
is? 

Answer.  That  is,  so  f  jir  as  the  apartment  cars  or  full  cars 
are  concerned,  they  contend  it  is  sometimes  necessary. 

Question.  I  can  see,  I  think,  where  it  was  a  mixed  car, 
where  they  were  carrying  baggage,  mail,  and  express  in  one 
car,  it  was  not  necessary  to  carry  the  mail  on  Sunday,  but 
they  would  still  have  to  run  that  car,  but  as  to  an  apart- 
ment car,  thev  could  switch  it  out  of  the  train,  could  thev 
not?  ' 

Answer.  That  is  our  contention,  certainly. 

Question.  Well,  how  about  the  mixed  car  ? 

Answer.  We  are  participating  in  that. 

Question.  You  do  ? 

Answer.  In  the  unused  space  in  the  mixed  car. 

Mr.  Wood.  Will  the  examiner  permit  a  question  there? 

Attorney  Examiner  Brown.  Yes;  surely. 

Question  (by  Mr.  Wood).  If  it  was  an  apartment  car, 
consisting  of  a  car  partitioned  in  two  parts,  one  contain- 
ing a  mail  compartment  and  the  other  containing  baggage 
space  only,  the  only  baggage  space  in  the  train,  how  could 
they  cut  that  apartment  car  out  of  the  train  on  Sunday 
and  leave  any  space  to  carry  the  necessary  baggage? 

Answer.  They  could  substitute  a  car  without  an  a])art- 
ment  in  it. 

Question.  Substitute  a  full  baggage  car  when  a  half 
baggage  car  would  do  ?     How  would  they  save  any  s])ace  ? 

Answer.  That  is  not  the  concern  of  the  Post  OfTice  De- 
partment, as  I  stated  yesterday. 


384 

Question.  And  you  would  liave  that  other  car  ke})t  idle 
for  six  days  in  order  to  substitute  for  the  apartment  car 
on  the  seventh  day;  is  that  the  idea? 

Answer.  The  railroad  coinj)anies  are  not  usually  conlined 
to  only  one  car.     They  have  other  cars.      (R.  477-479.) 

(G)  DEPARTMENT  WAS  OVER  LIBERAL  IN  PARTICIPAT- 
ING IN  ALL  SPACE  IN  MIXED  CARS. 

Mr.  McBride  testified  on  cross-examination  as  follows: 

Question  (by  Mr.  Wood).  But  if,  instead  of  mail  apart- 
ment authorization  on  that  train,  you  had  a  train  with  a 
consist  of  two  coaches  and  a  baggage  car,  and  in  that  baggage 
car  you  carried  closed-])OUch  mail,  baggage,  and  express, 
the  authorization  for  the  closed-])ouch  mail  being  for  six 
days  a  week,  and  you  ran  the  same  consist  of  the  train  on  the 
seventh  day,  would  you  assign  the  amount  of  the  closed- 
pouch  authorization"  on  the  seventh  day  in  the  baggage 
car,  which  you  had  to  run  on  the  seventh  day,  to  the  com- 
mon space,  the  unused  s])ace,  to  be  divided  between  pas- 
senger, mail,  and  express?  That  I  understand  to  be  plan 
No.  2  ? 

Answer.  That  is  true. 

Question.  Now,  why  did  you  do  that  ? 

Answer.  Well,  it  is  possible  that  we  have  been  overhberal 
to  the  railroads  in  that  case.  We  should  not  have  charged 
that  to  the  mail  service.  In  fact,  I  think  our  plan  No.  2 
was  overliberal  there  and  in  some  other  cases;  but,  of 
course,  your  classification  of  space  reported  on  Form  3 
shows  that  there  are  a  great  many  mixed  cars  in  which  no 
mail  is  carried  of  any  kind,  in  which  plan  No.  2  participates; 
but,  owing  to  the  enormous  job,  we  were  not  able  to  go 
into  and  get  out  every  one  of  those  items  any  more  than 
we  are  able  to  get  out  all  of  these  items  which  you  last 
referred  to.  Therefore  we  concluded  that  it  would  be  a 
fair  approximation  to  lumj)  all  of  that  stuff  and  particij^ate 
in  all  of  it. 

***** 

Question.  Then,  after  you  have  been  unduly  liberal  with 
us  and  consented,  under  ]dan  2,  to  provide  for  an  a])poi-- 
tionment  of  the  unused  s])ace  in  the  baggage  car,  on  what 
basis  do  you  apportion  that  as  between  the  passenger, 
mail,  and  expiess? 

Answer.  On  the  basis  of  the  used  s]iace  in  mixed  cars. 
*  *  *  *  * 

Question.  And  that  is  the  way  you]hav.e  divided  the 
waste  space  in  the  common  cars,  and  that  3'ou  think  is  right  ? 


385 

Answer.  I  would  like  to  modify  that  b}'  stating,  in  ascer- 
taining the  amount  of  the  used  space  in  mixed  cars,  we 
excluded  passenger  compartments  in  mixed  cars  and  mail 
apartments  in  mixed  cars.      (R.  452-454.) 

(H)  GENERAL. 

Mr.  McBride  testified  on  cross-examination  as  follows: 

Question  (by  Mr.  Wood).  But  you  do  not  think  there 
is  a  foot  of  space  in  that  train  an3nvhere.  under  any  con- 
ditions, except  that  actually  authorized  for  the  mail,  that 
should  be  charged  exclusively  to  the  mail  ? 

Answer.  Plan  Xo.  2  does  not  contemplate  anv  such  dis- 
I)Osition. 

Question.  And  neither  does  ])lan  Xo.  1  i 

Answer.     X" either  does  ])lan  Xo.  1. 

Question.  So  vour  answer  would  be  no  ? 

Answer.  Xo.  "  (R.  455,  456.) 

OX  THE  RAILROADS'  THEORY  OF  CHARGIXG  SPACE  TO  THE 
MAILS  THEY  COULD  SELL  THE  SAME  TO  THE  GOVERN- 
MENT REGARDLESS  OF  THE  POSTAL  NEEDS. 

Mr.  Gaines  testified  on  direct  examination  as  follows: 
Question  (by  Mr.  Stewart).  Xow,  Mr.  Gaines,  you  heard 
a  great  deal  of  testimony  by  the  railroad  witnesses  ^vith 
reference  to  the  oversize  cars  where  the  railroads  are  fur- 
nishing cars  or  apartments  in  cars  of  greater  size  than 
those  which  are  required  by  the  department.  Assuming 
that  the  railroads  could  furnish  the  units  of  cars  requested'^ 
but  do  not  do  so,  but  furnish  an  oversize  car,  what  have 
you  to  say  in  general  upon  the  railroad's  theory  that  the 
department  should  be  charged  with  the  entire  space?  *  *  * 
Answer.  The  claims  for  excess  space  made  by  the  rail- 
road witnesses  and  which  they  charge  against  the  opera- 
tion of  the  space  basis  include  cases  where  there  is  a  15- 
foot  authorization  and  30  feet  of  space  furnished,  where 
there  is  a  30-foot  authorization  and  a  60-foot  car  is  put  in 
service,  but  ^yhere  the  department  has  no  use  whatever 
for  the  additional  space.  The  remedy,  of  course,  would 
be  to  furnish  cars  as  authorized.  Otherwise  they  can  sell 
us  any  amount  of  space  they  choose,  and  in  excess  of  the 
needs  of  the  service,  by  the  general  use  of  oversize  cars. 
The  companies  also  claim  maximum  space  needed  on  anv 
part  of  the  car  run  should  be  paid  for  over  the  entire  length 
of  the  car  run,  although  the  car  operation  in  many  cases  is 
over  long  distances,  and  where  many  divisional  points  in- 
^e-'-ene,   and   where  it  would  be  entirely  Dracticable   to 

122698—19 25 


386 

change  the  consist.  In  some  cases  the  railroads  are  oper- 
ating cars  over  different  system  hnes,  as,  for  instance, 
between  St.  Louis  and  San  Antonio  or  St.  Louis  and  El 
Paso,  a  distance  of  about  1,500  miles,  and  in  the  case  of 
the  San  Antonio  movement  over  three  separate  railroad 
companies'  lines.     (Iv.  3240-3242.) 

THE  SPACE  REPORTED  DURING  THE  TEST  PERIOD  WAS 
THAT  FURNISHED  UNDER  THE  WEIGHT-BASIS  SYSTEM 
AND  IT  WAS  NOT  INTENDED  BY  THE  RAILROADS  TO  CON- 
FORM THE  UNITS  TO  THE  DESIGNATED  SPACE-BASIS 
UNITS  UNTIL  THE  SPACE-BASIS  SYSTEM  SHOULD  BE 
DEFINITELY  DETERMINED   UPON. 

Mr.  Wettling  testified,  on  direct  examination,  as  fol- 
lows: 

Question  (by  Mr.  Wood).  The  service  that  was  per- 
formed was  performed  in  the  equipment  that  had  been 
provided  to  take  care  of  the  mail  as  the  mail  service  was 
conducted  ? 

Answer.  Oh,  absolutely.  Of  course,  the  railroads  built 
no  new  equipment  to  meet  this.  They  could  not  be 
expected  to.  As  a  matter  of  fact,  this  matter  was  a  test, 
not  definitely  determined  that  it  w^as  to  be  applied  per- 
manently, and  no  railroad  company  could  afford  to  imme- 
diately transpose  or  rebuild  its  equipment  to  fit,  and  in 
many  cases  the  fact  that  they  did  rebuild  w^ould  not  save 
them  a  particle  of  space.     *     *     *^     (g    1068.) 

SPECIFIC  CASES  DISCUSSED. 

COMBINATION  OF  DESTINATION  LOADS,  RAILROAD 
EXHIBIT  NO.  65;  A  MUTUAL  ARRANGEMENT  TO  SAVE 
TRANSFERS  EN  ROUTE. 

Mr.  Gaixes  testified,  on  direct  examination,  as  follows: 

Question  (by  Mr.  Stewart)  .  Do  you  recall  Mr.  Mack's 
testimony  regarding  the  combination  of  destination  loads 
in  one  car?     I  think  he  had  it  illustrated  on  Exhibit  65. 

Answer.   Sixty-five? 

Question.  That  was  a  Houston  car,  a  San  Antonio 
car 

Answer.  Yes,  sir. 

Question.  Will  you  please  explain  how  that  was  oper 
ated? 

Answer.  It  was  an  arrangement  that  w^as  made  under 
the  weight  basis.  I  believe  Mr.  Mack,  as  well  as  myself, 
w^as  proud  of  the  arrangement  when  it  was  first  made, 
because  it  relieved  the  railroad  company  of  what  would 


387 

have  been  otherwise  a  necessity  for  transferring  a  large 
amount  both  of  mail  and  express  at  Palestine.  It  was 
an  arrangement  for  destination  loads  to  go  forward  over 
three  different  railroad  systems,  and  it  occurs  to  me  that 
it  might  be  worked  out  to  great  advantage  in  a  great  many 
other  cases  to  avoid  heavy  transfers  at  junction  points. 
Just  why  it  should  be  brought  in  as  a  criticism  against  the 
space  basis  I  do  not  know.  I  have  not  been  able  to  ascer- 
tain just  what  criticism  lies  against  the  arrangement. 

Question.  As  I  understand  it,  the  facts  were  that  there 
were  60  feet  authorized  between  St.  Louis  and  San  Antonio. 

Answer.   No,  sir;   St.  Louis  and  Palestine. 

***** 

Question.  And  two  cars  were  operated  in  the  train  in 
which  this  60  feet  were  distributed — 20  feet  in  one  car  and 
40  feet  in  the  other  ? 

Answer.  That  is  correct — -20  feet  in  one  car  and  40  feet 
in  another,  in  satisfaction  of  a  60-foot  railway  post  office 
authorization  between  St.  Louis  and  Palestine.  The  de- 
partment pays  for  a  round-trip  movement,  just  as  though 
the  railroad  company  were  furnishing  a  60-foot  storage  car 
in  satisfaction  of  a  60-foot  authorization. 

Question.   Xow,  an  arrangement  was  made  between  the 
railroad  company  and  the  department  whereby  20  feet  of 
that  60  feet  was  located  in  the  Houston  car  and  40  feet  in 
the  San  Antonio  car  ? 
Answer.  Yes,  sir. 

Question.  And  the  balance  of  those  two  cars  was  used, 
as  I  understand  you,  for  baggage  and  express  ? 

Answer.  For  baggage  and  express,  or  for  express,  I 
believe  it  is,  only.  In  the  San  Antonio  car,  at  any  rate, 
there  is  no  baggage  regularh^  carried.  In  fact,  I  do  not 
believe  there  is  in  the  Houston  car,  but,  at  any  rate,  it  is  a 
mixed  carload,  express  and  mail. 

Question.  What  was  the  advantage  in  that  arrangement  ? 

Answer.   The  advantage  was  to  avoid  heavy  transfer  at 

Palestine,   and,   incidentally,  what  would  have  been   the 

necessity  for  an  additional  porter  force  to  make  a  transfer 

at  Palestine. 

Question.   It  was  in  operation  under  the  weight  system? 
Answer.  It  was. 

Question.  And  was  arranged  between  the  railroad  com- 
pany and  the  department? 

Answer.  Yes,  sir.  We  were  very  glad,  indeed,  to  cooper- 
ate in  the  loading  at  that  time,  as  it  has  been  carried  on 
successfully  ever  since.  There  has  been  some  (question  in 
regard  to  the    40-foot  load  in   the  San  Antonio  car.     A 


388 

nonstandard  car  was  furnished,  and,  I  believe,  is  still  in 
use,  made  evidently  for  an  express  run  and  with  facilities 
for  the  use  of  the  express  messenger,  located  on  one  side  of 
the  door  of  the  car,  between  the  side  doors.  *  *  *.  (R. 
3261-8263.) 

ST.  LOUIS— LITTLE  ROCK-  TEXARKANA;  RAILROAD  EX- 
HIBIT NO.  65;  TRANSFER  AT  LITTLE  ROCK. 

Mr.  Gaines  testified  on  direct  examination  as  follows : 

Question,  (by  Mr.  Stewart).  *  *  *  Now,  referring 
to  the  same  exhibit,  No.  65,  do  you  recall  the  testimony  of 
Mr.  Mack  as  to  the  operation  of  the  60-foot  postal  car  be- 
tween St.  Louis  and  Little  Hock  and  the  30-foot  apart- 
ment authorized  thence  to  Texarkana? 

Answer.  I  recall  that,     *     *     *. 

Question.  What  are  the  facts  in  reference  to  that?  I 
call  your  attention  to  the  point.  Little  Rock,  and  the 
time  of  arrival  of  train  No.  17  and  the  departure  of  train  5. 

i\jiswer.  The  60-foot  postal  car  is  operated  over  the 
Missouri  Pacific  line  between  St.  Louis  and  Little  Rock 
in  train  No.  17.  Train  17  departs  from  St.  Louis  some- 
what in  advance  of  No.  5.  The  car  is  due  to  arrive  at 
Little  Rock  at  7  a.  m.  in  train  No.  17,  and  a  train  in  which 
we  ask  for  a  30-foot  car.  We  do  not  ask  for  that  car,  be 
it  understood;  we  ask  for  a  30-foot  car  to  be  operated  in 
train  No.  5  on  the  same  system,  which  leaves  Little  Rock 
at  8.50  a.  m.,  or  1  hour  and  50  minutes  after  the  60-foot 
car  in  question  arrives  at  Little  .Rock.  It  is  supposed  that 
the  railroad  company  did  not  have  a  suitable  30-foot  car 
to  be  used  between  Little  Rock  and  Texarkana,  and,  instead 
of  the  30-foot  car  requested,  are  using  the  60-foot  car 
which  is  operated  in  train  17,  St.  Louis  to  Little  Rock. 

I  w^ill  state  that  we  did  have  a  60-foot  car  authorization 
and  paid  for  on  train  No.  5  between  Little  .Rock  and  Fort 
Worth,  but  the  railroad  company  made  a  number  of 
changes  in  schedule.  I  believe  November  17  this  change 
was  made,  although  I  am  not  entirely  positive  of  that, 
whereby  No.  5  was  not  due  to  receive  the  large  amount  of 
mail  at  St.  Louis  which  it  had  formerly  received.  It  was 
discontinued  as  a  through  Texas  train  to  Fort  Worth, 
Dallas,  and  the  West,  and  we  had  no  use  for  any  car  on 
that  train  between  Little  Rock  and  Texarkana,  except  for 
the  purpose  of  distributing  the  local  mail.  Thirty  feet  of 
space  was  more  than  needed;  15  feet  would  not  have 
been  quite  enough,  and  we  requested  a  car  amply  sufficient 
hi  size  and  facilities  for  our  purpose,  and  the  company  is 
claiming  that  we  should  pay  for  the  60-foot  car,  which  we 
did  not  ask  and  which  we  do  not  need. 


389 

Question.  Now,  there  is  an  hour  and  fifty  minutes  at 
Little  .Rock  between  these  trains? 

Answer.  An  hour  and  fifty  minutes  by  schedule. 

Question.  The  60-foot  car"  is  cut  out  of  train  No.  17  and 
placed  m  train  5  ? 

Answer.  Placed  in  train  5;  yes,  sir. 

Question,     ^^d  proceeds  to  Texarkana  ? 

Answer.  Yes,  sir. 

Question.  How  far  is  it  from  Little  Rock  to  Texarkana? 

Answer.  It  is  about  190  miles,  I  think.  I  have  not  the 
exact  distance. 

Question.  If  they  had  the  30-foot  apartment,  there 
would  not  be  any  reason  why  it  could  not  go  into  tram  5  ? 

Answer.  No;  there  is  an  hour  and  fifty  minutes  for  any 
change.     (R.  3264-3266.) 

ST.    LOUIS-PALESTINE— AUTHORIZATION   BEYOND    PAL- 
ESTINE; RAILROAD  EXHIBIT  NO.  65;  TRANSFER  OF 
MAILS. 

Mr.  Gaines  testified  on  direct  examination  as  follows: 
Question,  (by  Mr.  Stewart).  Now,  referring  further  to 
this  Exhibit  65.  showing  the  destination  loads  of  the  40  feet 
of  mail  in  the  car,  St.  Louis  to  San  Antonio,  or  as  far  as 
Palestine,  and  a  30-foot  authorization  from  Palestine  to 
Taylor,  Mi\  Mack  testified,  I  believe,  that  the  same  load, 
St."^  Louis  to  Palestine,  was  carried  in  the  car  from  Pales- 
tine to  Taylor,  although  the  space  authorized  was  reduced 
to  30  feet  storage  between  Palestine  and  Taylor  ? 

Answer.  Yes,  sir.  That  is  Mr.  Mack's  testimony,  and 
is  specificallv  set  forth  in  this  exhibit.  I  made  a  state- 
ment to  the  ^effect  that  the  postal  clerks  were  transferring 
the  mail  en  route  from  the  baggage  storage  car,  the  San 
Antonio  car,  to  the  working  car  between  Longview  and 
Palestine,  and  that  that  accounted  for  the  difference  in 
the  authorization,  a  reduction  in  the  authorization  from 
40  to  30  feet.  Mr.  Mack  exhibited  a  diagram,  and  made  a 
statement  which  shook  my  confidence  at  that  time.  I 
thought  I  must  have  been  mistaken,  but  I  am  not  mistaken. 
I  knew  that  the  arrangement  had  been  in  force  for  a  very 
long  time,  and  if  it  had  been  discontinued,  I  had  not  been 
advised  of  it.  As  a  matter  of  fact,  not  only  the  working 
mails  for  our  San  Antonio  connections  are  transferred 
between  Longview  and  Palestine,  but  the  mail  for  local 
delivery  at  points  between  Palestine  and  Taylor  is  trans- 
ferred en  route  by  the  postal  clerks.  The  local  deliveries 
are  made  by  the  postal  clerks  from  the  car,  and  the  rail- 
road company  is  not  charged  with  that  duty,  Palestine 
south,  and  I  am  very  sure 


390 

Question.  Then,  from  your  information  about  the  facts 
in  that  case,  it  wouhl  api)oar  that  Mr.  Mack  was  mistaken 
when  he  stated  that  the  same  identical  load  was  carried 
on  between  Palestine  and  Taylor  ? 

Answer.  He  certainly  was  mistaken.     (K.  3266,  3267.) 

Further  discussion  of  the  facts  occurred  on  cross-ex- 
amination (R.  3303-3311)  and  Mr.  Gaines  submitted  a 
letter  from  chief  clerk,  Railway  Mail  Service,  as  the  basis 
of  his  statements,  as  follows: 

Railway  Mail  Service, 

Office  of  Chief  Clerk, 
San  Antonio,  Tex.,  March  31 ,  1919. 
The  Superintendent,  R.  M.  S.,  Fort  Worth,  Tex. 

I  am  in  receipt  of  your  letter  of  March  28,  in  which  you 
refer  to  recent  reports  made  by  me  in  connection  with 
complaints  of  the  I.  &  G.  N.  R.  R.  Co.,  alleging  delays  to 
their  trains,  account  of  handling  of  the  mail. 

In  reply  to  your  inquiry  in  the  Ifist  paragraph  of  your 
above-mentioned  letter,  will  state  that  clerks  in  Longview 
and  San  Antonio  train  3  have  instructions  to  make  specific 
report  whenever  the  railroad  company  does  not  furnish 
sufficient  help  to  do  the  actual  loading  and  storing  of  the 
mail  loaded  into  the  baggage  end  of  the  mail  car  of  train  3 
at  Longview  Junction,  and  as  I  have  received  no  recent 
report  showing  that  this  was  not  being  done,  I  assume  that 
the  railroad  company  is  furnishing  proper  assistance  at  that 
point. 

A  considerable  quantity  of  mail  for  local  delivery  between 
Longview  and  Palestine  is  loaded  into  the  baggage  end  of 
the  mail  car  and  one  of  our  clerks  is  detailed  to  unload 
such  mail  at  the  various  local  stations. 

At  Palestine  the  railroad  company,  as  a  rule,  furnishes 
sufficient  porters  to  do  the  actual  physical  labor  of  unload- 
ing the  mail,  while  our  clerks  supervise  the  unloading  of 
such  mail. 

Also,  as  a  general  rule,  all  of  the  mail  for  local  delivery 
between  Palestine  and  San  Antonio  is  transferred  into  the 
mail  car  at  Palestine,  except  that  for  Austin  and  connec- 
tions, the  latter  mail  also  being  unloaded  from  the  baggage 
car  by  one  of  our  clerks,  while  this  clerk  also  unloads  about 
a  truck  of  working  mail  at  Taylor,  which  is  transferred 
into  the  mail  car  at  that  point. 

In  train  5,  all  of  the  mail  on  hand  at  Longview  Junction 
on  arrival  of  T.  &  P.  train  5  is,  under  normal  conditions, 
loaded  into  the  mail  car.  The  No.  3  working  mail  which  is 
being  stored   in   the   Palestine   storage   car  is  still   being' 


k 


391 

transferred  by  our  clerks  en  route  between  Longview  and 
Palestine,  while  the  separations  of  the  Palestine  and  Gal- 
veston mail  in  the  Palestine  storage  car  are  being  made 
by  the  railroad  employees. 

Our  clerks  again  make  transfer  en  route  of  San  Antonio 
working  connections  and  of  mail  for  local  delivery  between 
Palestine  and  Taylor,  while  one  of  our  clerks  is  also  detailed 
to  unload  the  mail  from  the  storage  car  at  such  points 
where  the  quantity  of  mail  is  too  great  to  be  transferred 
into  the  mail  car  en  route,  as,  for  instance,  at  Hearne, 
Milano,  Taylor,  Austin,  and  San  Marcos. 

I  understand  from  the  third  paragi-aph  of  your  above- 
mentioned  letter  that  the  clerks  in  charge  in  the  Long- 
view  and  San  Antonio  R.  P.  O.  can  be  relieved  from  keep- 
ing record  of  delays  which  occur  at  all  junction  points,  and 
that  if  they  make  report  of  the  delays  that  occur  at  Long- 
view  Junction,  Palestine,  Taylor,  and  Austin,  that  will  be 
sufficient,  particularly  as  keeping  record  of  delays  at 
these  four  points  will  not  increase  the  average  hours  on 
duty  to  an  unreasonable  extent. 

Ihave  therefore  modified  my  Order  No.  5779,  under 
date  of  March  S,  accordingly,  "a  copy  of  modified  order 
being  herewith  inclosed. 

Edward  Arnold,  CMff  ClcrV. 

(R.  331 1-331 8.) 

AUTHORIZATIONS  OF  EMERGENCY  SERVICE     RAILROAD 
EXHIBIT  NO.  67;  A  METHOD  TO  MEASURE  THE  SERV- 
ICE   ACTUALLY    PERFORMED    AND    PROVIDE    PAY- 
.     MENT  THEREFOR. 

Mr.  Gaixes  testified  on  direct  examination  as  follows: 
Question  (by  M-.  Stewart).  Mr.  Gaines,  this  matter 
has  been  referred  to  a  great  many  times,  but  I  feel  that, 
inasmuch  as  it  has  been  cited  as  atypical  case  in  your 
division,  I  would  like  to  ask  you  to  refer  to  Railroad 
Exhibit  No.  67,  which  illustrates  the  authorizations  of 
emergency  space  for  a  period  between  Palestine  and  San 
Antonio,  "and  this  shows  frequent  changes  en  route.  Novy, 
assuming  this  to  be  in  connection  with  the  dej)artmont's 
rule,  what  have  you  to  say  about  it.  just  biieily  ^  Vou 
have  the  exhibit,  I  believe  '. 

Answer.  Yes,  sir.  The  cxliil)it  shows  that  a  3()-foot 
storage  authorization  is  in  effect  between  Palestine  and 
Taylor  and  a  lo-foot  authorization  between  Taylor  and 
San  Antonio.  The  space  is  in  a  reguhir  baggage  cai-. 
There  was  an  eme'gency  authorization  in  addition  to  the 
regular  autliorization  in  the  same  car  which  vaiied  from 
station    to    station,    increasing    as    the    train    iKsinMl    San 


392 

Antonio.  This  did  not  afToct  tlio  regular  authoi'ization 
in  tho  car,  but  niorely  carod  for  the  excess  mails  above  the 
mails  which  were  cari-ied  in  the  rej^jularly  authorized  space. 

This  emergency  authorization,  like  all  others  of  the  same 
class,  was  made  only  when  the  space  was  found  in  the 
consist  of  the  train  run,  and  occupied  space  which  would 
not  otherwise  have  been  used.  Whatever  may  be  the 
criticism  n]K)n  this  plan  of  authorization,  it  was  a  method 
devised  to  measuie  the  service  actually  performed  and  to 
provide  payment  for  it. 

Concerning  the  inquiry  as  to  whether  the  department 
(;ould  not  have  paid  for  the  full  car  all  the  way  through,  it 
may  be  said  that  this  was  a  baggage  car,  and  there  is 
nothing  to  show  whether  or  not  the  car  was  partly  occu- 
pied by  baggage.  If  there  was  any  baggage  in  it,  it  could 
not  have  been  paid  for  as  a  storage  car. 

Question.  Now,  from  your  experience,  is  that  fairly 
typical  of  that  class  of  service'^ 

Answer.  It  is.  I  will  say,  Mr.  Stewart,  that  that  is,  I 
think,  quite  an  extreme  case — not  typical  of  the  service,  as 
a  rule.  I  do  not  know  of  very  many  cases  in  my  division 
where  we  have  had  authorizations  of  just  that  kind  in 
excess  of  a  30-foot  regular  authorization.  The  occurrence 
was  on  December  22,  I  believe,  one  of  the  heaviest  days 
of  the  year  from  a  mail  standpoint,  and  I  believe  there 
were  two  60-foot  storage  cars  and  a  60-foot  railway  post- 
office  mail  car  in  tlie  train  at  the  same  time. 

Question.  I  should  not  have  said  "typical,"  I  intended 
to  ask  whether  it  is  fairly  representative  of  the  manner  in 
whicli  the  department  handles  those  cases. 

Answer.   It  is.      (R.  3259-3261 .) 

PAYMENT    FOR    STORAGE    SPACE    ST.    LOUIS    TO    FORT 
WORTH,  RAILROAD  EXHIBIT  NO.  68. 

Mr.  Gainp:s  testiiied  on  direct  examination  as  follows: 

Question  (by  Mr.  Stewart).  Now,  referring  further  to 
this  Exhibit  No.  6S,  what  have  you  to  say  in  regard  to  Mr. 
Mack's  contention  that  the  storage  space  in  that  baggage 
car  should  be  paid  all  the  way  through  from  St.  Louis  to 
Fort  Worth,  although  the  Texarkana  mail  carried  in  the 
baggage  car  down  to  that  point  may  be  transferred  into  the 
mail  car  in  the  same  train  ? 

Answer.  I  presume,  Mr.  Stewart,  you  mean  the  Fort 
Worth  and  Dallas  mail  loaded  in  that  car  might  be  trans- 
ferred at  Texarkana  ?  That  is  what  I  get  from  the  exhibit. 
***** 

Answer.  We  are  having  loaded  in  St.  Louis,  as  I  under- 
stand,  through  mails  for  Dallas  and   Fort  Worth  in  the 


baggage  car  in  ()uestion,  wliich  runs  through  between  St. 
Louis  and  Fort  Worth.  The  mail  car  would  not  accommo- 
date that  storage  mail  until  the  mail  for  Texarkana  is  dis- 
])atched  out  of  the  car.  It  seems  that,  as  a  rule,  after  the 
dispatch  of  the  Texarkana  mail  tliere  would  be  space  in 
the  mail  car  for  the  Fort  Worth  and  Dallas  through  mail 
that  was  loaded  in  the  baggage  car  at  St.  Louis,  and  under 
the  rules  of  the  dej^artment  the  railroad  company  is  given 
the  oj^tion  of  making  the  transfer  of  the  mail  from  the 
baggage  car  to  the  mail  car  under  cases  of  that  kind,  or 
of  carrying  it  through  in  the  baggage  car,  but  without 
additional  pay  for  the  space  so  used  in  the  baggage  car,  on 
the  ground  that  we  hare  space  available  in  the  mail  car, 
in  which  that  could  be  placed.  Sometimes,  *  *  *  -^-e 
are  making  that  transfer,  but  it  is  not  in  accordance  with 
the  rules  that  we  should  do  so  or  that  the  railroad  company 
should  do  so. 

Question.  The  question  here  is  the  matter  of  space  in  the 
cars  and  operation  of  the  cars,  and,  as  I  understand  you, 
there  are  two  cars  in  which  mails  are  carried — first,  there 
is  the  full  car,  St.  Louis  to  Fort  Worth;  then  there  is  the 
baggage  car,  in  which  there  is  a  15-foot  authorization,  and 
in  that  15-toot  authorization  Fort  Worth  and  Dallas  mails 
are  placed  at  St.  Louis;  is  that  right? 

Answer.  That  is  right.  I  am  not  sure  as  to  there  being 
the  15-foot  authorization,  but  that  is  the  train. 

Question.  Well,  whatever  the  authorization  may  be. 

Answer.  That  is  the  idea;  yes,  sir. 

Question.  When  that  train  reaches  Texarkana,  the  same 
cars  are  in  the  consist? 

Answer.  The  same  cars  are  in  the  consist. 

Question.  And  the  mails  in  the  full  car  have  been  re- 
duced to  such  an  extent  that  it  jjermits  the  transfer  of 
these  mails  which  were  ])laced  in  the  15-foot  authorization, 
if  that  be  the  authorization,  into  the  full  mail  car? 

Answer.  Yes;  that  is  correct. 

Question  (by  Attorney  Examiner  Browx).  *  *  * 
Xow,  just  looking  at  it  casually,  if  they  have  set  aside  that 
space  at  St.  Louis,  and  they  have  made  up  their  train  ac- 
cordingly, they  may  leaxe  some  baggage  behind  or  some- 
thing else,  but  the  car  is  full  of  baggage  up  to  the  15  feet 
which  you  have  authorized.  That  s})ace  is  still  there,  is  it 
not  ?     It  is  still  set  aside  under  those  circumstances  ? 

Answer.  Well,  if  we  say  we  can  take  that  mail  into  the 
mail  car  the  space  is  relinquished.  Whether  the  railroad 
company  can  make  use  of  it  is  another  matter.  Some- 
times they  can  and  sometimes  I  su))])ose  they  can  not;  but 


894 

at  any  rate  we  relinquish  the  spare.  That  of  course  is  the 
contention  of  the  com])anies,  that  that  space,  as  a  rule,  is 
not  available  foi*  other  business. 

Question  (b}' Mr.  Stewart).  You  mean,  Mr.  Gaines, 
that  the  authorization  ceases  there;  it  is  no  longer  re- 
quired ? 

Answer.  No  longer  required.  It  ceases  at  this  divisional 
])oint. 

Question  (by  Attorney  Examiner  Brown).  Of  course,  in 
the  case  of  o])erating  a  train,  as  has  been  mentioned  here, 
you  can  not  shorten  up  a  car,  you  can  not  cut  off  the  15 
feet,  and  the  car  is  necessarily  trans])orted  on  to  the  end 
of  the  run,  is  it  not?  It  has  to  be.  Xow,  I  am  not  com- 
mitted to  the  idea  one  way  or  the  other,  but,  as  a  question 
of  abstract  justice  between  the  department  and  the  carrier, 
is  there  any  reason  why,  having  set  aside  that  15  feet  and 
using  it  two-thirds  of  the  way  to  destination,  the  carrier 
is  not  still  holding  out  that  15  feet  of  space  for  the  use  of 
the  Post-OfTice  Department  ? 

Answer.  Well,  Mr.  Examiner,  in  this  particular  case, 
which  is  quite  typical,  the  change  is  made  not  only  at  a 
divisional  point  but  at  an  initial  point  on  another  rail- 
road systen  line.  The  Missouri  Pacific  ends  at  Texar- 
kana  and  the  Texas  &  Pacific  begins  there.  It  is  true 
that  they  are  closely  associated  and  the  trains  are  run 
through  just  as  though  it  were  a  systeu,  hut  the  question 
arises  with  the  Post  Office  Department  naturally  to  what 
extent  this  niight  be  carried,  the  railroad  companies  claim- 
ing pay  for  the  maximum  space  used  on  car  runs,  and 
they  control  the  car  runs.  They  have  cars,  I  believe, 
that  are  running  through  from  St.  Louis  to  Laredo,  Tex., 
and  from  Chicago  to  Houston,  Tex.,  I  believe,  but  these 
extremely  long  car  runs  are  in  the  control  of  the  railroad 
company,  ancl  if  we  had  to  pay  for  the  maxi'uu-u  space 
used  over  the  entire  line,  it  would  be  greatly  in  excess 
of  the  needs  of  the  Post  Office  Department. 

Question  (by  Mr.  Stewart).  Well,  this  car  is  a  baggage 
car,  is  it  not,  Mi-.  Gaines  ? 

Answer.  It  is  a  baggage  car,  and  we  aie  limited  to  onl.v 
a  small  portion  of  that  car  for  mail  purposes. 

Question.  It  is  a  car  which  would  be  run  under  any 
circumstances  in  the  consist  of  the  train,  would  it  not  ^ 

iVnswer.  Yes ;  they  would  have  to  run  the  baggage  car. 
I  do  not  think  this  arrangeirent  is  adding  to  the  tonnage 
of  the  train. 

Question.  They  would  not  have  to  run  this  car  for  the 
purpose  of  accoiim^odating  the  mails  beyond  the  point  of 
authorization  ? 

Answer.  No.     (R.  8269-:i273.) 


395 

RAILROAD   EXHIBIT   NO.  68.     DEFICIENCY   IN    STORAGE 
IN  60-FOOT  POSTAL  CAR. 

iVIl'.  Gaines  testified  on  direct  examination  as  follows: 

Question  (by  Mr.  Stewart).  Exhibit  68,  the  diagram  at 
the  bottom  of  the  page,  at  the  left,  you  will  notice  that  the 
statement  is  made  there,  and  I  think  All-.  Mack  so  testified, 
that  there  was  23  feet  deficiency  in  that  60-foot  car.  What 
are  the  facts  about  that? 

Answer.  The  deficiency  charged  against  the  railroad 
company  is  9 J  feet  instead  of  23  feet.  That,  I  would 
think,  was  just  a  mistake  in  entering  it  on  the  blue  print, 
but  it  occurs  in  the  testimony,  and  I  judge  from  reatling 
Mr.  Mack's  testimon}'  that  he  meant  that  the  140  sacks, 
or  whatever  part  of  that  nuruber  might  be  transferrecl 
from  the  iuail,  might  be  placed  in  the  baggage  car — had  to 
be  scattered  around  over  the  car  in  a  way  that  occupied  the 
23  feet.  That  is  the  onlv  explanation  I  can  give  of  the 
23-feet  exhibit.     TR.  3267,  3268.) 

OPERATION  OF  CAR  BETWEEN  TEXARKANA  AND  LONG- 
VIEW  JUNCTION.     RAILROAD  EXHIBIT  NO.  68. 

Mr.  Gaixes  testified  on  direct  examination  as  follows: 

Question  (by  Mi\  Stewart).  Now,  Mr.  Gaines,  on  the 
same  exhibit,  No.  68,  there  is  an  example  with  reference 
to  the  operation  of  a  train  between  Texarkana  and  Long- 
view  Junction.  That  is  over  the  Texas  &  Pacific,  and  there 
is  an  authorization,  I  believe,  between  Longview  Junc- 
tion and  San  Antonio  over  the  International  &  Great 
Northern.  Recallmg  Mr.  Mack's  claim  for  the  operation 
of  that  car  between  Longview  Junction  and  Texarkana, 
will  you  please  state  what  the  facts  are  as  you  iray  know 
them  ? 

Answer.  Tlie  facts  were  very  fully  set  forth  in  Mr.  Mack's 
testimony,  and  this  diagram  makes  it  very  clear.  It  is 
true  that  there  was  a  very  heavy  transfer  of  mail-  also 
baggage  and  express,  I  believe — being  made  at  Longview 
Junction.  It  was  causing  delay  to  both  the  Texas  jc 
Pacific  train  bringing  the  irail  in,  and  the  International 
&  Great  Northern  train  taking  the  mail  out  of  Longview 
Junction.  We  had  been  endeavoring  to  find  some  way  to 
obviate  the  delay,  and  destination  loads,  mixed  loads  of 
mail,  baggage,  and  express,  bad  been  suggested.  That  was 
not  considered  advisable,  I  believe,  as  a  through  ir.ovement 
froDi  St.  Louis,  but  on  account  of  tlic  verv  large  an.ount 
of  mail  that  was  being  taken  on  at  Texarkana.  Mr.  Mack 
suggested  the  happv  solution  of  having  this  combinatiou 
mail  and   baggage  car,  which  was   being  operated  in  the 


396 

IntciiKitioiial  iSc  (ireat  Northorii  train  l)etwecii  Longview 
and  Sail  Antonio,  operalod  tlirou^ijh  to  Texarkana  and  set 
out  there  for  advance  loadinii^,  not  only  of  the  mail,  baggage, 
and  express  originating  at  Texarkana,  but  to  furnish 
facilities  for  the  handling  of  the  International  &  Great 
Northern  mail:  that  is,  the  mail  south  of  Longview  Junc- 
tion that  was  brought  into  Texarkana  by  tTie  Missouri 
Pacific. 

I  notice  that  Mr.  Mack  stated  in  his  testimony  that  the 
car  was  not  being  used  to  any  great  extent  for  express.  I 
have  not  the  information 'personally  on  that  point,  but 
that  was  the  purpose  of  its  being  run  there.  It  was  to 
provide  means  of  handling  mail,  baggage,  and  express,  and 
avoid  delays  to  the  trains  and  avoid  porter  force  at  Long- 
view  Junction,  and  it  has  worked  very  successfully.  1 
think  the  arrangement  would  be  good  under  the  space, 
under  the  weight,  or  under  anv  other  basis  of  pavm.ent,. 
(K.  3274,  3275.) 

CALDWELL  TO  DALLAS  VIA  FORT  WORTH  A  60-FOOT 
RAILWAY  POST-OFFICE  CAR  WAS  AUTHORIZED 
BETWEEN  CALDWELL  AND  FORT  WORTH,  AND  THE 
RAILROAD  RAN  IT  THROUGH  FROM  FORT  WORTH 
TO  DALLAS  OVER  A  WEIGHT  ROUTE  AND  CHARGED 
THE  OPERATION  TO  THE  MAILS. 

Mr.  Gaines  testified  on  direct  examination  as  foUows: 

Question  (by  Mr.  Stewart).  You  heard  the  testimony 
of  Mr.  Searle  with  reference  to  the  o]:)eration  of  a  full 
60-foot  car  between  Fort  Worth  and  Dallas  over  a  weight 
route — I  believe  the  route  was  from  Caldwell  to  T  alias  by 
way  of  Fort  Worth — in  consequence  of  which  the  company 
in  its  statistical  data  charged  the  full  space  of  its  opera- 
tion to  the  mails.  Will  you  ex])lain  the  circumstances 
under  which  the  o])eration  occurred  ? 

Answer.  A  60-foot  car  is  being  operated  under  a  60-foot 
authorization  between  Kansas  City  and  Fort  Worth.  Tex. 
The  mail  car,  the  authorization  for  which  terminates  at 
Fort  Worth,  was  operated  through  between  Fort  Worth  and 
Dallas,  a  distance  of  approximately  35  miles,  and  although 
that  part  of  the  line  between  P'ort  Worth  and  Dallas  is  on 
the  weight  basis,  a  charge,  as  I  understand  it,  for  the 
operation  of  that  car  was  made  against  the  space  basis. 
We  have  not  insisted  that  the  car  be  cut  out  at  Fort  Worth 
for  advance  work  by  the  railway  postal  clerks,  although  it 
would  be  somewhat  of  advantage  to  this  service  to  do  so. 
Within  the  last  few  months  a  very  considerable  amount  of 
mail  was  diA'erted  to  this  closed-])ouch  weight  line  at 
Dallas,  and  the  company  given  a  reweighing  and  readjust- 


397 

merit  on  the  weight  basis.  The  mail  so  diverted  is  not 
being  placed  in  the  postal  car  which  is  operated  between 
Fort  Worth  and  Dallas  and  Dallas  and  Fort  Worth,  but  in 
the  baggage  car,  wliich  is  operated  Dallas  to  Fort  Worth 
only,  being  cut  out  of  train  12,  the  one  in  which  the  postal 
car  is  operated,  at  the  latter  ))lace.  Only  local  mail  for 
the  line  is  loaded  into  the  postal  car,  which  the  railroad 
com])anj  runs  through  over  this  weight  basis  line  for  its 
own  convenience. 

Question.  Then,  as  a  matter  of  fact,  although  the  60-foot 
car  is  operated  over  a  weight  basis  route,  the  main  part  of 
the  mails  wliich  re])resent  the  pay  received  for  that  service 
are  not  even  carried  in  the  car  ^ 

Answer.  Xo.  There  is  nothing  but  the  local  mail  for  the 
line  for  the  Caldwell  and  Fort  Worth  line,  Fort  Worth 
north,  that  is  carried  in  that  car.  It  is  my  understanding 
that  that  car  contains  a  combination  load  of  mail,  baggage, 
and  express,  serving  the  purposes  of  all  three  *  *  * 
and  is  operated  froni  Dallas  to  Fort  Worth  and  cut  out  at 
Fort  Worth  upon  arrival  there,  and  as  far  as  I  know  with- 
out any  delay  to  the  train  for  switching. 

Question.  Xow.  of  coui-se,  Fort  Worth  is  a  ])oint  at  which 
any  change  can  be  made  in  the  consist  of  the  train  ? 

Answer.  Yes,  sir;  it  is  entirely  practicable. 

Question.  Do  you  know  of  any  reason  why  that  opera- 
tion should  be  charged  against  the  Post  Office  Department  ? 

Answer.  I  don't  know  of  any  except  the  general  proposi- 
tion that  we  pay  for  space  in  cars  which  the  railroad  coin- 
pany  would  prefer  for  some  reason — of  course,  in  this 
particular  case  it  is  evident  that  they  operate  it  through 
for  the  purpose  of  avoiding  switcliing  at  Fort  Worth — but 
it  seems  to  me  that  the  fact  that  they  are  operating  a  car 
that  is  cut  out  at  Fort  Worth  would  indicate  that  the  mail 
car  might  also  be  handled  in  the  same  way  and  without 
material  delay  to  their  ti'ain.  We  were  very  glad  to  agree 
to  the  arrangement  of  allowing  the  postal  car  to  run 
through  Fort  Worth  to  DaUas  and  Dallas  to  Fort  Worth, 
although  we  had  no  use  for  it,  so  as  to  avoid  any  possibility 
of  delaying  their  train  at  Fort  Worth.  HoAvever.  it  is  very 
Ukely  that  the  mails  originating  at  Fort  Worth,  if  loaded 
in  that  car  before  arrival  of  train  12  from  Dallas,  would 
serve  to  make  it  ])ossible  to  ])erform  the  local  service  more 
expeditiously  than  now,  because  the  car  would  be  sejb  for 
advance  loading  of  all  the  mails  originating  at  Fort  Worth 
and  from  connection  lines,  and  would  be  ])laced  therein 
before  the  train  from  Dallas  arrived. 

Question.  Xow,  if  the  rule  followed  by  the  company  in 
that  case  were  ado])ted   as  the  rule  or  as  the  basis  for 


308 

charf^ing  the  space  against  the  de])artment  it  would  result, 
would  it  not,  in  charging  to  the  mails  100  ])er  cent  of  that 
entire  movement  under  all  circumstances  where  trains  were 
ojierated  in  the  same  manner,  where  it  a])pears  that  the 
o])eration  is  mainly,  if  not  entirely,  for  the  accommodation 
of  the  purposes  of  "the  company  and  not  for  the  convenience 
of  the  mails  ? 

Answer.  It  would.      (R.  3232-3235.) 

SPECIFIC  CASES  MENTIONED  BY  RAILROAD  WITNESSES 
MACK  AND  SEARLE  ARE  NOT  TYPICAL  AND  REPRE- 
SENTATIVE IN  ALL  CASES. 

Mr.  Gaines  testified  on  cross-examination  as  follows : 

Question  (by  Mr.  Wood)  .  Now,  Mr.  Gaines,  you  heard 
the  testimony  of  Mr.  Mack,  and  you  heard  the  testimony 
of  Mr.  Searle,  did  you  not  ? 

Answer.  Yes,  sir. 

Question.  And  I  ask  you  whether  the  cases  they  gave 
and  the  illustrations  which  they  made  are  not  fairly  repre- 
sentative of  the  relation  between  the  authorizations  of  the 
Post  Office  Department  and  the  service  performed  by  the 
railroad  company  in  your  division  ? 

Answer.  No,  sir;  I  think  the  statements  of  Mr.  Searle 
and  Mr.  Mack  made  about  the  space  authorizations  do  not 
represent  the  average  conditions  at  all. 

Question.  Well,  they  are  representative  conditions  that 
exist  on  other  lines  in'your  territory,  are  they  not? 

Answer.  Not  generally  applicable;  no.     (R.  3324.) 

Mr.  Gaines  also  testified  on  cross-examination  as  follows ; 

Question  (by  Mr.  Wood).  Well,  you  will  admit,  won't 
you,  that  all  of  the  cases,  or  all  of  the  kinds  of  cases,  that 
were  disclosed  by  the  testimony  of  Mr.  Mack  and  of  Mr. 
Searle  are  typical  and  representative  of  the  conditions  on 
your  division  generally,  wherever  the  opportunity  presents 
itself  to  you  *  *  *  to  reduce  the  space  authorizations 
irrespective  of  the  operating  requirements  of  the  rail- 
road? 

Answer.  No,  sir;  I  would  not  say  that. 

Question.  All  right.     We  will  have  to  go  on. 

Answer.  All  right.  Well,  I  don't  know  that  I  want  to 
go  into  that,  but  I  can  give  examples  to  the  contrary. 

Attorney  Examiner  Brown.  Well,  give  us  a  few. 

Question  (by  Mr.  Wood).  I  do  not  say  that  this 
situation  exists  on  every  train  on  your  division.  I  say 
that  where  the  opportunity  affords  itself  to  you  to  reduce 
your  space  authorizations  in  exactly  the  same  manner, 
and  make  them  in  exactly  the  same  manner,   as  illus- 


I 


I 


399 

trated  by  Mr,  Mack  and  Mr.  Searle,  you  do  it  irrespective 
of  the  operating  requirements  of  the  railroad  company? 

Answer.  No,  sir;  not  always.  Would  you  like  to 
hear — — 

Attorney  Examiner  Brown.  Yes;  give  us  one  or  two. 

The  Witness.  Let  me  give  you  the  operation  of  the  fast 
mail  train  between  St.  Louis  and  San  Antonio,  which  is 
the  most  important  mail  train  we  have.     *     *     * 

As  far  as  the  needs  of  the  service,  from  a  distributing 
facility  standpoint  are  concerned,  a  30-foot  mail  apartment 
would  be  ample  for  all  purposes  between  Little  Rock  and 
Longview  Junction.  That  car  is  paid  for  both  ways  over 
the  line  between  St.  Louis  and  San  Antonio  as  a  60-foot 
full  railway  post-office  car.  We  recognize  the  operating 
conditions  on  that  railroad,  the  necessity  for  running  that 
train  through  as  (R.  "on"  sic)  a  fast  train,  the  impracti- 
cability of  cutting  out  the  car  at  Little  Rock  and  cutting 
another  one  in  at  Longview  Junction  in  that  particular 
train,  and  we  disregard  the  needs  of  the  service  as  might 
make  it  practicable  to  reduce  the  authorization  of  that 
train.     (R.  3332-3334.) 

Answer.  There  are  several  examples  of  that  kind,  but 
I  will  admit  that  we  do  reduce  distributing. space  authori- 
zations in  a  few  cases  before  we  get  to  the  end  of  the  car  run. 

Question.  All  right,  sir. 

Answer.  There  is  no  dispute  on  that  point. 

Question.  So  what  they  have  said  is  the  condition  that 
exists  on  other  lines  in  your  territorj^? 

Answer.  Well,  what  they  have  said  in  connection  with 
that  exists  on  certain  lines  in  the  eleventh  division.  (R. 
3336,  3337.) 

Question.  You  have,  with  the  possible  exception  of  the 
class  of  cases  which  we  were  discussing  just  before  lunch, 
namely,  the  case  of  full  storage  car  authorizations,  for 
only  a  part  of  the  days  of  the  week,  and  less  than  full 
storage  on  the  remaining  days,  resulting  in  the  actual 
operation  of  the  full  storage  every  day,  substantially  every 
class  of  cases  described  by  Mr.  Mack  and  Mr.  Searle,  not 
only  on  their  lines,  but  on  other  lines  in  your  division,  have 
you  not  ? 

Answer.  If  you  will  specify  those  cases — I  do  not  mean 
individually,  but  I  am  perfectly  free  to  admit  that  there 
are  cases  in  the  division  where  we  reduced  distributing 
units,  numerous  cases  where  we  discontinued  or  reduced 
baggage-car  units,  and  that  class  of  cases.     (R.  3343.) 

Question.  Now,  Mr.  Gaines,  after  this  review,  and  with- 
out going  into  details  in  the  various  cases  in  your  division, 
would  you  be  willing  to  admit  that  the  cases  recited  by 


400 

Mr.  Mack  and  Mr.  Soarlo  are,  in  fact,  representative  con- 
ditions that  exist  on  other  lines  in  yoiii-  division? 

Answer.  There  are  cases  of  the  kind  that  you  mention, 
yes;  but  Mi-.  Mack  and  Mr.  Searle  made  some  statements 
that  I  remember  that  1  will  not  indorse. 

Question.  Wimt  are  they? 

Answer.  Especially  Mr.  Mack,  in  je^iard  to  the  great 
ini]K)sition  on  the  ba(j;t2;aj^eman  hi  handling  mail  into  and 
out  of  the  baggage  cars,  calling  for  expert  knowledge  of 
the  distribution.  That  does  not  occur  in  the  eleventh 
division  that  I  know  of,  anywhere. 

Question.  Now,  with  that  exception,  you  are  willing  to 
admit  that  the  conditions  that  they  described  are  repre- 
sentative of  the  conditions  on  lines  other  than  your  own, 
in  your  division  ? 

Answer.  Not  all  lines,  but  some  lines  everywhere.      (K. 
3348.) 
DENVER  AND  RIO  GRANDE. 

Mr.  Brauer  testified  on  direct  examination  as  follows: 

Question  (by  Mr.  Stewart).  Mr.  Brauer,  you  heard  the 
testimony  of  Mr.  Mack  with  reference  to  the  Denver  &  Rio 
Grande  case  ? 

Aiisw^'.  Yes,  sir. 

Question.  Will  you  please  state  the  facts  with  reference 
to  that,  as  you  are  acquainted  with  them  ? 

Answer.  Well,  the  facts  of  the  case,  as  testified  to  by 
Mr.  Mack,  are  just  as  stated  by  him.  There  is  a  15-foot 
authorization,  storage  authorization,  in  a  train  of  the 
Denver  &  Kio  Grande,  and  they  haul  three  baggage  cars 
in  the  train.  One  goes  down  Alamosa  way,  one  to  Salida, 
and  one  to  Leadville,  and  the  mail  is  piled  in  those  three 
different  cars.  I  don't  know  just  what  the  complamt  wa,s. 
It  is  a  good  thing  for  us,  and  it  is  a  good  thing  for  the  rail- 
road company  to  handle  it  in  that  way.  That  is  not  an 
uncommon  practice.     We  go  even  further  than  that. 

For  instance,  out  of  Omaha,  on  the  Burlmgton,  we  have 
two  trains  operating  out  of  there.  One  goes  up  to  Billmgs 
in  the  summer  and  one  goes  out  in  the  wintertime,  when 
the  traffic  is  liglit.  These  two  trains  are  combined  between 
Omaha  and  Lincoln.  Now,  during  all  of  last  summer,  we 
had  a  15-foot  authorization  m  one  train  and  a  30-foot 
authorization  in  another  tram.  When  they  combined  the 
two  trains  we  put  the  facts  up  to  the  department,  and  the 
department  authorized  a  60-foot  storage. 

Question  (by  xVttorney  Examiner  Browx).  From  Lin- 
coln on  ? 


401 

Answer.   Fi-oin  Lincoln  to  Omaha  and  l)a(k. 

Question.  That  is  when  you  had  one  train  ? 

Answer.  That  is  when  the  trains  were  ('oni})ined. 

Now,  as  a  matter  of  fact,  there  was  very  little  mail  car- 
ried in  that  car  that  the  d(>partment  authorized.  The 
mail  was  carried  in  the  Billinjtjs  baggajre  and  Denver  l)a<:;- 
gage  and  the  Lincoln  mail,  with  the  Liiicohi  ba,c:t2;age  and 
express  in  this  car.     That  was  kicked  out  at  Lincoln. 

Now,  the  only  reason  I  cite  that  is  that  it  lias  reference 
to  the  proposition  of  cooperation. 

As  far  as  this  instance  is  concerned,  we  have  contmued 
that  car  on  tlii'ough  to  Denver.  The  mails  got  heavier — 
I  don't  know  just  why,  but  the  parcel  post  began  running 
heavy  out  there,  and  the  car  has  been  continued  through 
to  Denver. 

^  ^  :^:  :•;  ^ 

Question.  That  is  really  a  split-load  })roposition  ? 
Answer.  A  split-load  proposition.      {R.  .3874-3376.) 

OMAHA  AND  COLORADO  SPRINGS. 

Mr.  Brauer  testified  on  direct  examination  as  follows  r 

Question  (by  Mr.  Stewart).  Referring  to  Chicago, Rock 
Island  &  Pacific  train  7,  Omaha  to  Colorado  Springs, 
referred  to  by  Mr.  Searle,  will  you  please  state  what  there 
is  about  that  case  ? 

Answer.  The  company  operates  a   60-foot  car  on   that 
run  })etween  Omaha  and  Colorado  Springs,  626  miles. 
***** 

As  far  back  as  I  can  remember — I  have  not  looked  at  the 
records — the}"  always  did  operate  the  60-foot  car  on  that 
particular  set  of  trains,  7  and  8.  Prior  to  the  space  basis 
of  payment,  the}'  got  nothing  for  operating  that  car,  exce])t 
what  was  involved  in  the  pay  on  trie  weight.  There  never 
was  a  time  that  more  than  30  feet  of  distributing  space  was 
needed  It  is  not  needed  now,  but  when  the  space  basis  took 
effect  the  60-foot  car  was  authorized  between  Omaha  and 
Belleville  and  return,  under  the  rule  thatif  you  carry  storage 
both  ways,  the  next  unit  larger  would  ))e  authorized. 

Now,  about  a  year  ago,  I  think  it  was,  Mr.  Searle  came  to 
me  and  stated  that  he  had  the  proposition  up  of  cutting  this 
OO-foot  car  out  at  Belleville.  The  train  combines  at  Belle- 
ville with  train  39  from  Kansas  City,  and  the  load  to  be 
transferred  from  the  mail  train  to  the  Kansas  City  consist, 
it  seems,  was  lighter  than  to  l)e  transferred  the  other  way. 

Now,  we  had  a  conference  ovov  the  matter,  and  the  result 
was  that  1  asked  for  an  authorization  for  the  car  to  con- 
tinue on  to  Pliilli]>sburg,  and  that  is  where  it  ends  now.     It 

122698—19 2(i 


402 

goes  from  a  GO  to  a  30  at  Phillipsburg,  Kans.  The  mails 
fighton  up  there.  You  leave  Omaha  with  a  big  load,  and  by 
the  time  you  get  to  Phillipsburg  you  are  getting  into  a  thinly 
settled  territory,  and  niost  of  the  mail  has  been  delivered. 
Of  course,  the  company  oi)erates  the  GO-foot  car  through 
now,  as  it  did  befoiT  it  went  on  the  space  basis,  and  as  has 
been  testified  here,  it  is  very  common  for  the  carrier  to 
operate  oversize  mail  cars. 

Question  (by  Attorney  Examiner  I^kown).  Is  Phillips- 
l)urg  a  passenger  junction  point? 

Answer.  Oh,  yes.  It  is  a  divisional  point  in  every  sense 
of  the  word.  Train  crews  change  there,  engine  cre^ys 
change  there,  and  mail  crews  change  there.  It  is  the  big 
divisional  ]ioint,  I  would  say,  between  Kansas  City  and 
Colorado  Springs. 

Now,  as  to  the  excessive  amount  of  excess  mail  that  was 
carried  in  that  car  on  the  day  that  Mr.  Searle  mentioned,  I 
can  only  say  that  about  that  time  we  were  getting  a  lot  of 
freight  shipments  from  mail  order  houses  into  Grand 
Island.  They  shipped  their  catalogues  by  freight  to  Grand 
Island,  and  it  goes  into  the  mail  at  that  point,  and  they 
delivered  it  to  the  zone  around  Grand  Island.  That  takes 
in  western  Nebraska,  northern  and  western  Kansas,  and 
eastern  Colorado.  I  do  not  know  whether  this  happened 
on  that  particular  day,  but  it  was  running  heavy,  and  I 
think,  really,  it  must  have  happened  on  that  day,  because 
we  have  in  a  60-foot  mail  car  onh^  13  feet  of  storage  space, 
and  in  a  30-foot  car  we  are  entitled  to  7  feet  of  storage 
space.  That  would  leave  6  feet  of  storage  space  belonging 
to  the  railroad  company  between  the  stanchions. 

Now,  Mr.  Searle,  I  think,  testified  to  something  like  15 
or  16  feet  of  mail  going  into  that  6  feet,  and  it  w^as  put  in 
there  hy  count.  It  must  have  been  a  lot  of  small  sacks, 
just  such  as  these  mail-order  houses  send  out,  two  or  three 
catalogues  in  a  small  No.  2  sack. 

That  was  the  first  complaint  I  ever  heard  about  that 
train:  but  if  that  excess  mail  has  been  running  regularly, 
there  is  just  one  thing  for  me  to  do,  and  that  is  to  recom- 
mend a  regular  unit;  that  is  all. 

Question.  Much  of  that  catalogue  stuff  was  hauled  in 
freight  cars,  was  it  not? 

Answer.  Yes ;  *  *  *  and  we  made  arrangements  to 
load  it  into  freight  cars.  We  hauled  it  on  the  local 
freights,  and  the  local  freight  line  delivered  it  from  station 
to  station  down  over  the  Grand  Island  and  out  on  the  Rock 
Island.  The  mail  was  shipped  out  by  freight  to  Grand 
Island.  Of  course,  local  freight  is  not  a  very  fast  service, 
])Ut  it  is  better  than  to  fill  up  the  mail  cars  with  it. 


403 

Question,   (by  Mi*.    Stewart).  And    they   got   the   full 
mail  rates  for  that  movement? 
Answer.  Yes,  sir. 

***** 

In  connection  with  the  cutting  of  the  space  at  Phillips- 
burg,  we  cut  from  a  60  to  a  30.  Mr.  Searle  says  it  would 
be  impracticable  to  transfer  that  mail,  and  put  what 
baggage  he  has  left  in  his  60-foot  car  into  a  combination 
30-30.  My  clerks  out  there  say  it  would  be  practicable. 
I  don't  know,  but  as  to  the  time  it  would  take,  it  has  been 
stated  here  that  it  would  take  from  30  to  35  or  45  minutes 
to  make  a  transfer  of  that  kind.  Now,  out  at  Grand 
Junction,  on  the  Denver  &  Rio  Grande,  on  train  No.  1, 
there  is  a  30-foot  apartment  car  authorized  from  Denver, 
Colo.,  to  Ogden,  Utah.  Up  to  within  a  very  short  time 
ago.  Grand  Junction,  being  the  end  of  the  run,  the  carriers 
spotted  the  car  on  the  westbound  section  and  transferred 
the  mail  and  baggage  over  into  another  car,  and  the  only 
difference  between  the  two  cars  was  the  number  stenciled 
on  the  side.     That  was  done  in   10  minutes  dead  time. 

Take  the  fast  mail  out  of  Union  Pacific  Transfer.  We 
had  up  to  a  few  months  ago  only  30  minutes'  dead  time  to 
transfer  all  the  mail  from  Burlington  15,  which  averages 
about  3  or  4  carloads,  into  Omaha  and  Ogden  5,  and  our 
dead  time  was  30  minutes.  Of  course,  we  never  got  out 
of  town  on  that  time,  and  it  has  been  extended  now  to  45 
minutes.     (R.  3376-33S0.) 

LINCOLN  AND  BILLINGS. 

Mr.  Brauer  testified  on  cross-examination  as  follows: 

Question  (by Mr.  Wood).  Now,  on  one  of  those  trains  you 
have  a  regular  15-foot  storage  authorization  from  Alliance 
in  addition  to  the  30-foot  apartment  authorization  ? 

***** 

Question.  And  in  addition  to  that  15-foot  regular  storage 
authorization  from  Alliance  to  Billings  you  have  emergency 
storage  authorizations  practically  every  day;  in  the  year? 

Answer.  It  ought  to  be  increased,  if  that  is  the  case,  to 
the  next  highest  unit. 

Question.  Well,  it  has  run  on  this  way  for  some  two  or 
three  years. 

Answer.  Two  or  three  years  ?     That  is  almost  impossible. 

Question.  Practically  ever  since  the  space  basis  has  been 
in  operation,  has  it  not? 

Answer.  Well,  all  I  have  to  say  to  that  is  that  if  it  had 
been  brought  to  my  attention,  and  that  is  correct,  it  would 
have  been  increased  to  the  next  higher  unit. 


404 

Question.  You  moan  the,  regular  storage  would  be  in- 
creased ? 

Answer.  Yes,  sir.      (K.  3r>2_>,  :^523.) 

***** 

Question.  Now,  then,  as  1  understand  your  proposition, 
as  Alliance  is  a  division  point  the  Post  Office  Department 
should  be  permitted  to  continue,  as  it  does,  to  change  that 
60-foot  authorization  to  a  30-foot  apartment  car  at 
xMliance  ? 

Answer.  Yes,  sir. 

Question.  You  say  that  irrespective  of  the  fact  that  even 
though  the  shift  were  made  the  railroad  company  would 
have  to  haul  a  60-foot  car  in  both  directions? 

Answer.  If  the  shift  was  actually  made  the  railroad  com- 
pany would  not  have  to  haul  the  60-foot  car  for  the  entire 
use  of  the  mail  service  in  both  directions,  my  dear  sir. 

Question.  If  the  mail,  as  your  evidence  shows,  appropri- 
ated that  whole  car  out  of  Alliance,  please  tell  me  what  use 
they  would  have  for  it  for  other  traffic  ? 

Answer.  Certainly,  if  they  insist  upon  running  that  60- 
foot  car  the  mail  service  will  appropriate  the  whole 

Question  (interrupting).  No;  I  am  not  speaking  of  the 
present  operation.  I  am  assuming  that  they  comply 
from  the  standpoint  of  railroad  operation  with  your 
authorizations,  and  substitute  at  Alliance  a  30-foot  apart- 
ment car  with  a  30-foot  baggage  end,  the  entire  capacity 
of  that  car  would  be  exhausted  by  the  mail  and  yet  the 
railroad  company  would  operate  that  car  in  both  direc- 
tions. 

Answer.  And  I  am  assuming  that  if  the  railroad  coni- 
pany  did  comply  that  there  would  be  very  little  mail 
over  and  above  that  15  feet  in  the  baggage  end  of  the  car. 

Question.  That  does  not  seem  to  be  borne  out  by  these 
emergency  reports  with  31  feet  of  emergency,  18  and  19 
and  14  and  15,  running  day  after  day.  You  may  be  enough 
of  a  mathematician  to  get  that  into  a  30-foot  baggage  end 
with  a  15-foot  regular  authorization  and  still  have  a  lot 
of  space  left,  but  I  can't. 

Answer.  Well,  if  they  had  31  feet,  15  feet,  and  put  it 
all  in  the  bao;gage  car  where  the  baggage  rides • 

Question  (interrupting).  They  didn't  put  it  all  in  the 
baggage  car.  Part  of  it  moved  in  the  oversize  railway 
post-office  car.  But  if  they  had  complied  with  your 
authorizations  the  railroad  company  would  have  exhausted 
a  full  60-foot  car,  consisting  of  a  30-foot  apartment  and 
30  feet  of  baggage  space,  wouldn't  they  ? 

Answer.  I  don't  think  so;  no,  sir. 


405 

Question.  Xotwithstanding  th.-  fact  that  your  regular 
authorizations  occupy  45  feet  and  your  emergency  autriori- 
zations  run  from  10  to  30  ? 

Answer.  I  still  don't  think  so. 

Question.  And  you  think  that  the  railroad  company 
ought  to  be  expected  to  make  that  shift  at  xVlliance  and 
transfer  all  that  mail  into  the  car  that  they  would  cut  in 
at  that  point  ? 

Answer.  I  think  this:  The  department  hadn't  ought  to 
be  forced  to  pay  for  60-foot  distributing  car  over  841 
miles  of  track,  provided  they  only  use  it  on  any  day  over 
300  miles  of  track.  And  if  the  department  didn't  have 
that  to  say,  what  is  to  prevent  the  carrier  from  running 
this  same  60-foot  car  all  the  wav  into  Seattle  over  that 
same  train?     (R.  3530-3532.) 

CHANGING  CARS  AT  OMAHA. 

Mr.  Brauer  testified  on  direct  examination  as  follows : 

Question  (by  Mr.  Stewart).  Did  you  cover  the  question 
of  the  Omaha  car  ? 

Answer.  Mr.  Searle  testified  to  the  effect  that  he  was 
forced,  under  threat  of  fine,  to  begin  the  running  of  this 
60-foot  car  at  Omaha,  and  I  guess  that  is  true.  I  know  I 
wrote  him  a  letter  about  it,  but  here  are  the  circumstances 
in  that  case:  That  60-foot  car,  the  law  provides  that  it 
shall  be  set  in  the  station  for  advance  loading.  Mr. 
Searle  made  a  mistake  when  he  said  it  was  wanted  for 
advance  distribution,  but,  then,  as  a  rule,  those  cars  are 
wanted  for  just  that  thing:  but  in  this  case,  it  is  wanted 
just  for  advance  loading.  The  clerks  only  have  an 
hour  there,  and  it  is  a  daily  paper  train.  It  leaves 
Omaha  at  12.30  a.  m.  It  gets  a  good  stiff  load  of  daily 
papers,  the  Omaha  Bee  and  World-Herald,  and  an  horn- 
is  a  very  short  time  for  the  clerks,  only  three,  to  change 
their  clothes  and  get  that  mail  piled*  That  was  what 
the  car  was  actually  wanted  for. 

Now,  as  a  matter  of  fact,  we  did  try  to  run  that  car 
through.  We  got  together  on  the  proposition,  and  the 
company  did  have  a  period  of  eight  or  ten  days'  running 
it  through,  and  we  tested  it  out,  and  it  took  them  just  as 
long,  if  not  a  little  bit  longer,  to  cut  the  Chicago  car  out 
and  set  my  car  in  as  it  did  to  load  all  the  mail  after  the 
train  came  in.  Then  I  insisted  on  having  a  car  started 
out  of  there.  Of  course,  thev  got  paid  the  terminal  rate. 
(R.  3380,  3381.^ 


406 

HELENA  TO  SPOKANE. 

Mr.' Knox  testified  on  direct  examination  as  follows: 
Question  (by  Mr.  Stewart).  Mr.  Knox,  I  am  going  to 
call  your  attention  particularly  to  Mr.  Pettibone's  testi- 
mony. He  stated  in  direct  examination  that  the  60-foot 
distributing  cars  are  of)erated  west  of  Helena  to  Spokane, 
and  ])ecause  of  operating  conditions  and  weather  condi- 
tions in  the  wintertime,  it  made  it  impracticable  to  change 
from  60-foot  distributing  cars  to  30-foot  apartment  cars  at 
Helena.  Will  you  please  state  what  the  facts  are  about 
that  ? 

Answer.  Tlie  facts,  as  I  miderstand  the  matter,  m  rela- 
tion to  those  cars,  are  that  when  the  space  basis  went  into 
effect,  or  shortly  thereafter,  the  Northern  Pacific  began 
operating  60-foot  cars  in  the  thirteenth  division  in  trains  1 
and  2  toButte  and  in  trains  3  and  4  to  Helena.  At  Butte 
and  at  Helena,  these  cars  were  supplanted  by  30-foot 
apartments,  with  30-foot  storage.  They  began  operating 
these  60-foot  cars  *  *  *  on  November  26,  1916. 
In  June,  1017,  the  company  began  operating  the  oversize 
60-foot  cars  through  to  Spokane  in  trains  1  and  2  from 
Butte,  but  the  60-foot  car  in  trains  3  and  4  was  changed  to 
a  30-foot  apartment  at  Helena  on  September  3,  1918.  In 
the  meanwhile,  the  department  had  authorized  a  line  of 
60-foot  cars  m  trains  3  and  4  between  ISIiles  City  and 
Helena,  in  August,  1917,  and  between  Miles  City  and 
Spokane,  via  Butte,  in  trains  1  and  2,  in  the  same  month, 
because  of  rule  22.  It  made  a  physical  change  in  the  cars 
in  trains  1  and  2  at  Butte,  but  during  the  winter  of  1916-17 
and  the  winter  of  1917-18  it  made  a  physical  change  in 
these  cars  from  60  to  30  at  Helena  in  trains  3  and  4.  They 
are  now  sendmg  the  oversize  60-foot  car  through  in  trains 
3  and  4,  not  to  Spokane,  but  to  Seattle,  and  the  distributing 
car,  which  is  not  oversize,  in  trains  1  and  2  now  changes 
at  Spokane.  For  a  time  they  sent  that  through  to  Seattle. 
(R.  3685-3687.) 

OVERSIZE  CARS  IN  TRAINS  401   AND  402,   SEATTLE  TO 
PORTLAND. 

Mr.  Kxox  testified  on  direct  examination  as  follows: 

Question  (by  Mr.  Stewart)  .  Mr.  Pcttibone  made  a  state- 
ment as  to  the  necessity  of  operatmg  oversize  cars  in  trains 
401  and  402  between  Seattle  and  Portland. 

^Vnswer.  The  necessity  for  operating  the  oversize  cars 
on  trains  401  and  402  is  apparent  only  because  the  com- 
pany does  not  happen  to  have  a  sufficient  supply  of  30-foot 
apartment  cars.     These  oversize  cars,  by  the  way,  in  trains 


407 

401  and  402,  are  70-foot  cai's,  m  which  there  is  a  40-foot 
mail  apartment — a  ear  that  is  not  nseci  in  the  service. 
Therefore,  they  have  been  on  that  line  since  before  the 
space  basis  went  into  effect,  the  same  as  in  trains  401  and 
402,  and  the  same  as  in  other  trains,  but  they  have  not 
been  used  generally  in  the  thirteenth  division  on  the  various 
lines  of  the  Northern  Pacific.  There  is  no  necessity  of 
operating  anything  Imt  a  30-foot  apartment  in  trains"  401 
and  402,  except  that  the  company  vrants  to  make  nse  of 
these  odd  size  cars.     (R.  .3687.) 

TJNWORKED  PAPER  MAIL  TAKEN  INTO  SPOKANE  TESMI- 
NAL. 

Mr.  Knox  testified  on  direct  examination  as  follows: 

Question  (by  Mr.  Stewart).  Yit.  Pettibone  also  testi- 
fied as  to  an  order  issued  by  (^liief  Clerk  Fuller  in  your 
division,  I  believe,  in  relation  to  the  taking  of  the  un- 
worked  paper  mails  in  train  3  into  the  Spokane  terminal 
for  distribution.  Will  you  please  state  what  the  facts  are 
about  that  ? 

Answ^er.  As  I  recollect  it,  in  Mr.  Pettibone's  testimony, 
he  stated  that  an  order  was  placed  upon  the  order  book  by 
the  chief  clerk  at  Helena  for  clerks  to  carry  through  in 
train  3  of  the  Northern  Pacific  line  to  Spokane  for  distri- 
bution all  unworked  paper  mails,  and  stated  that  it  w^as 
possible  that  the  order  was  induced  by  reason  of  the  desire 
of  the  department  to  conserve  space,  and  that  the  residt 
of  the  order  w^as  to  delay  mail. 

The  order  of  the  chief  clerk,  in  the  first  place,  was  in 
error.  As  soon  as  I  noted  w^hat  the  chief  clerk  had  said, 
I  called  his  attcTition  to  the  same,  and  had  the  ])roper  in- 
struction issued,  which  was  to  the  effect  that  clerks  in 
train  3  would  take  to  tl;e  Spokane  terminal  undistributed 
all  miscellaneous  ])aper  mails,  except  daily  papers  origi- 
nating east  of  Helena,  which  is  the  initial  terminal  of  the 
run  of  the  clei'ks,  and  that  these  mails  slundd  be  taken  to 
the  Spokane  terminal  for  distribution. 

Question.  Now,  what  was  tlie  reason  for  that  ( 

Answer.  1'he  reason  for  that  order  was  not  to  conserve 
space,  Imt  it  was  made  necessary  by  the  extreme  shortage 
of  men  in  the  Northwest.  At  that  time,  wdien  this  order 
was  issued,  practically  one-third  of  the  force  of  clerks  in 
Montana  had  gone  to  war,  or  had  taken  outside  employ- 
ment because  of  higher  wages.  ?]very  extra  man  that  we 
had  in  the  (Ustrict  had  left  oin-  service.  The  mails  in- 
creased in  train  3.  There  was  no  way  to  handle  the  mails, 
because  we  coidd  not  get   any  clerks  to  put  on  the  train. 


408 

TluM-ofoio,  we  took  this  iiiiscellanoons  ))a])er  mail,  which 
wonhl  loast  siiffcr,  into  tho  S))()kano  toriniiial  for  distrihu- 
tioi),  wiicro  we  were  a])le  to  ein])l()y  women,  who  eoiihl  not 
be  on  the  traijis.  The  order  had  nothing  to  do  with  space 
whatsoever,  and  does  not  affect  the  space  payment  at  all, 
and  there  has  been  no  change  in  the  space  authorizations 
by  reason  of  the  same  on  the  Northern  Pacific  lines. 

Question.  Mr.  Pettibone  further  testified  that  a  daily 
pa])er  from  St.  Paid  destined  for  Ritzville,  Wash.,  would 
go  to  a  Nortiiern  Pacific  train  out  of  vSt.  Paul,  and  under 
the  provisions  of  the  order  just  discussed,  or  similar  orders, 
would  go  into  the  Spokane  terminal,  involving  delay. 
What  are  the  facts  about  that? 

Answer.  Mr.  Pettibone  is  mistaken  in  that  respect.  The 
St.  Paul  daily  papers  destined  to  Ritzville,  or  any  other 
point  in  Washington,  would  go  to  Great  Northern  fast  mail 
train  27  in  a  sack  labeled  "  "Washington  State  daily  papers." 
This  sack  is  distributed  by  clerks  in  the  fast  mail  train, 
made  up  in  a  direct,  and  forwarded  at  connecting  points  hj 
first  train  to  destination.  There  is  no  delay  involved  or 
])ermitted  in  relation  to  daily  papers.  The  matter  of 
space  is  not  involved  in  this  question  at  all.  (R.  3687- 
3689.) 

WITHHOLDING    PAPER    MAILS    FOPw    DISPATCH    OUT    OF 
POKTLAND. 

Mr.  Knox  testified  on  direct  examination  as  follows: 

Question  (by  Mr.  Stewart).  Mr.  Pettibone  also  quoted 
from  an  order  issued  in  February,  1917,  by  Chief  Clerk  Ott, 
of  the  Railway  Mail  wService  at  Seattle,  in  relation  to  the 
withholding  of  paper  mails  for  dispatch  on  Nortiiern  Pa- 
cific train  408  out  of  Portland.  What  are  the  facts  in 
regard  to  that? 

Answer.  As  I  recall  Mr.  Pettibone's  testimony  in  that 
regard,  he  stated  that  the  order  was  issued  to  sa.ve  space  in 
train  408,  and  that  the  result  of  the  order  was  to  material^ 
delay  the  mail,  stating  that  a  portion  of  it  might  be  delayed 
24  hours.  The  order  was  issued  in  order  to  save  space  in 
train  408,  but  there  was  no  mail  delayed. 

Tlie  facts  in  the  case  are  somewhat  as  follows: 

When  the  space  basis  was  placed  in  operation,  we  recom- 
mended for  authorization  in  trains  413  and  408,30-foot 
apartments  in  each  direction  and  storage  in  eacli  direction. 
The  department  authorized  60-foot  cars  in  trains  413  and 
408.  The  company  had  no  60-foot  cars  to  place  on  the 
route,  and  ])laced  4()-foot  cars  on  it,  which  cars  were  oper- 


409 

ated  at  the  time.  In  making  an  investigation  of  the 
matter,  I  discovered  that  the  authorization  for  train  552, 
particularly,  leaving  Portland  after  train  408,  consisting 
of  7  feet  of  storage  space,  was  not  used  to  any  great  extent, 
only  a  few  sacks  of  mail  being  carried  there.  I  also  dis- 
covered that  the  department  authorized  for  train  458, 
leaving  Portland  at  10  a.  m.,  scarcely  contained  any  mail 
whatsoever.  It  was,  however,  necessary  to  carry  this 
apartment  back  to  Seattle.  I  therefore  made  a  recom- 
mendation to  the  department  in  the  case,  which  reads 
as  follows : 

Fehrt'ary  !t.  HUT. 
Thf  Gknekal  St  i'khixtkxdent,  PIailway  Mail  Service, 

Washington ,  D.  C 

Since  Decemlier  the  Xoiihern  Pacific  Railway  has  been  operating  in 
irains  4!o  and  408,  the  Seattle  c\:  Portland  Railway  Postoffce.  route 
ITlolM.  a  40-foot  mail  apartmeni  in  a  70-foot  car  in  lieu  of  the  (iO-foot 
distributing  car  authorized  in  those  trains.  When  the  service  on  this 
line  was  placed  on  the  space  basis,  recommendation  was  made  for  .SO  feet 
nf  dislrib-uting  space  and  30  feet  of  storage  in  train  413,  with  30feetdistril)- 
uling  space  and  15  feet  storage  in  train  408.  In  conformity  with  the  rule 
adopted,  where  storage  space  was  necessary  in  both  directions  in  connec- 
tion with  distributing  space  requested,  authorizations  were  made  for  60- 
foot  distributing  cars  in  this  set  of  trains  in  lieu  of  the  space  requested 
by  this  division. 

It  now  develops  that  since  the  Portland  it  Ashland  train  IH  fails  to 
connect  with  train  408  at  Portland — 

That  train  is  a  through  train  from  the  south,  from  San 
Francisco.  That  was  connecting  with  408  prior  to  the 
installation  of  the  space  basis,  but  had  its  schedule  changed 
at  about  that  time. 

— the  service  mav  be  handled  in  train  408  in  a  30-foot  apartment 
without  additional  storage  space,  provided  only  use  is  made  of  the 
7-foot  closed-pouch  space  available  in  train  562,  route  171526,  leaving 
Portland  at  8.30  a.  m.,  following  train  408.  Mail  for  Tentralia  &  Hoquiam 
points  may  V)e  held  for  train  562  at  Portland,  as  well  as  certain  miscel- 
laneous paper  mails  destined  for  connections  via  Seattle  that  can  as  easily 
be  made  by  train  562  as  l)y  train  408. 

In  view  of  the  condition  that  now  prevails,  and  the  further  fact  that 
Ihe  railroad  company  is  not  operating  eO-foot  cars  in  these  trains,  it  is 
recommended  that  the  authorizations  be  changed  to  the  following,  offec- 
li\e  March  1: 

Train  413,  Seattle  to  Portland,  30-foot  apartment  twice  a  week. 

Train  413.  Seattle  to  Portland.  30-foot  baggage-car  space  twice  a 
week. 

Train  '108.  Portland  to  Seattle.  oO-foot  ai)artment  7  times  a  week. 

Now,  at  that  time,  train  408  left  Portland  at  7.35  a.  m. 
and  arrived  at  Seattle  at  2.20  p.  m.  Train  562  left  Port- 
land at  8.30  a.  m.  and  arrived  at  Seattle  at  3.15  p.  m. 
Train  458  left  Portland  at  10  a.  m.  and  arrived  at  Seattle 
at  4.15  p.  m.     Now,  the  mail  that  was  going  forward  in 


410 

this  storage  space  in  train  408  was  hold  back  to  train  562 
and  train  458,  thus  making  it  practicable  for  me  to  recom- 
mend a  reduction  in  authorization  to  30  feet,  which  was  my 
original  recommendation,  in  distributing  space.  The  mail 
was  not  delaj^ed,  inasmuch  as  we  sent  on  train  562  mail  for 
the  Centralia  &  Hoquiam  branch,  with  which  train  562 
connected.  Mails  held  back  for  train  458  included  only- 
such  mails  for  connecting  lines  as  train  458  connected,  as 
well  as  train  408.  If  there  were  any  mails  that  could  not 
go  on  Train  562,  they  were  held  for 'train  458,  which  made 
every  connection,  except  two,  out  of  Seattle,  which  were 
made  by  train  408.  There  were  no  mails  held  back  that 
would  be  delayed  in  the  slightest.  The  change  was  made 
merely  in  the  interest  of  handling  the  service  in  a  proper 
and  economical  manner,  from  our  standpoint.  (R.  3689- 
3693.) 

DIVERSIONS  OF  MAIL  TO  OTHER  LINES  WHERE  SPACE 
WAS  AVAILABLE  AND  PAID  FOR. 

Mr.  Searle  testified  on  cross-examination  as  follows: 

Question  (by  Mr.  Stewart).  You  spoke  of  certain  di- 
versions from  some  of  your  trains  to  the  trains  of  other 
companies.  Were  not  those  diversions  diversions  of  mail 
to  other  lines  where  space  was  available  for  carrying  those 
mails  ? 

Answer.  Undoubtedly.     There  would  be  no  other  reason. 

Question.  Exactly;  and  the  department  is  paying  for 
that  space  on  other  lines  ?  ■ 

Answer.  That  is  the  reason  the  change  was  made,  in 
order  to  avoid  additional  space  on  other  trains.     (R.  2128.) 

INFERENCES     DRAWN     FROM     RAILROAD     EX- 
HIBITS UNSOUND. 

OBJECTION  ON  THE  PART  OF  THE  POST  OFFICE  DEPART- 
MENT TO  ALL  EVIDENCE  AS  TO  INCREASES  IN  RAIL- 
ROAD WAGES  AND  EXPENSES  SUBSEQUENT  TO  THE 
STATISTICAL  PERIOD. 

Mr.  Stewart.  At  this  point,  Mr.  Examhier,  I  would  like 
to  enter  objection,  so  far  as  it  may  be  considered  in  this 
case,  as  to  all  the  data  concemmg  wages  and  expenses 
subsequent  to  the  statistical  period. 

Attorney  Examiner  Brown.  It  is  understood  that  your 
objection  goes  to  all  that  testimony.     (R.  1391.) 


411 

BAILROAD  EXHIBIT  NO.  47.— DOES  NOT  SHOW  OPERAT- 
ING RATIO  FOR  PASSENGER  SERVICE;  DOES  NOT 
SHOW  RATIOS  BETWEEN  REVENUE  AND  EXPENSE 
FOR  ANY  SERVICE  MENTIONED,  INCLUDING  MAIL; 
DOES  NOT  SHOW  THAT  THE  MAILS  PARTICIPATED 
IN  THE  SAME  DEGREE  AS  PASSENGER  IN  ALL  IN- 
CREASED EXPENSES. 

Mr.  WoiiTHiXGTON  testified  on  eross-exainination  as  fol- 
lows: 

Answer.  It  was  my  conclusion  that  the  increase  in  the  rail- 
way mail  pay  was  insufficient  to  compensate  for  the  increased 
services  rendered. 

Question  (by  Mr.  Stewart)  .  Now  in  what  manner  does 
your  exhibit  lead  to  such  a  conclusion  ? 

Answer.  The  exhibit  shows,  as  I  explained  yesterday, 
that  the  railway  mail  pay  was  the  only  element  of  railway 
transportation  which  has  not  shown  a  decided  growth  in 
the  aggregate  since  1900,  all  other  classes  having  grown 
quite  materially  as  to  gross  revenue,  those  increases  in 
revenue  being  necessary  to  meet  the  increases  in  railway 
operating  expenses,  which  are  sho^^Tl  on  the  same  chart, 
the  relative  figure  for  operating  expense  in  1900-1918  ])eing 
as  100  to  357,  the  railway  mail  pay  as  100  to  142.  The 
chart  does  not  show  the  work  done  for  carrying  the  mails, 
but  the  increase  in  ton  mileage  was  202.91  per  cent  com- 
pared with  an  increase  in  revenue  of  42  per  cent. 

Question.  Is  it  not  true,  however,  that  before  you  can 
draw  a n}^  conclusion  such  as  you  have  stated,  you  must  first 
show  the  ratio  between  revenue  and  cost  for  any  class  of 
service,  taking,  for  instance,  as  illustrative,  the  Railway 
Mail  Service  ? 

Answer.  It  would  be  desirable,  if  it  were  possible,  to 
show  the  ratios  of  revenue  to  cost  for  all  those  various 
classes  of  service  for  the  years  in  this  chart;  but  that  is 
absolutely  impossible,  and  it  is  so  obviously  impossible  that 
I  did  not  attempt  to  show  it.  I  showed  on  another  exhibit 
that  the  passenger  train  operating  expense  ])er  mile  had  in- 
creased very  largely  from  1900  to  1918,  and  as  the  mails  are 
carried  on  practically  every  passenger  train,  I  think  it  is  a 
fair  assumption  that  their  revenues  should  have  gone  up 
proportionately  to  the  other  ])assenger  traffic  revenues  to 
j)ay  the  increased  expenses  for  operating  the  })assenger 
trains. 

Question.  Then  it  would  foUow  fiom  your  statement  that 
the  mails  must  j)articipate  in  the  san)e  degree  in  all  your 
increasing  expenses  as  your  passenger  service  '. 


412 

Answer.  I  think  all  classos  of  railway  revenue  should 
f)articipate  in  })aying  the  increased  expenses. 

Question.  In  tlie  same  ratio  ( 

Answer.  As  to  the  same  ratio,  if  the  ratio  of  service  ren- 
dered on  the  passenger  train  was  exactly  the  same  in  one 
period  as  another,  I  should  say  in  exactly  the  same  ratio, 
and  it  is  evident  that  that  is  true  as  to  the  mail,  because  the 
mail  ton  mileage  increased  202  per  cent;  the  passengers 
carried  1  mile  increased  1 90  per  cent,  or  almost  exactly  the 
same  ratio. 

Question.  But  there  is  nothing  in  this  case  or  in  the 
record  anyw^here  that  would  justify  the  conclusion  that  the 
expenses,  passenger  expenses,  for  instance,  and  the  cost  of 
passenger  operation,  building  of  great  terminals,  such  as 
are  found  in  New  York,  Chicago,  and  St.  Louis,  would  make 
a  charge  to  the  mails  in  the  same  degree  that  they  do  against 
the  passenger  service. 

Answer.  The  building  of  the  large  terminals  you  refer  to 
does  materially  increase  the  amount  of  money  needed  for 
return  on  investment,  but  it  does  not  increase  to  any  large 
extent  the  railway  operating  expenses  in  the  passenger 


service. 


*     *     * 


Question.  However,  your  statement  does  not  even  show 
the  operating  ratio  for  the  passenger  service  alone.  Your 
figures  are  related  to  the  entire  service,  including  the 
freight. 

Answer.  Because  the  passenger  expenses  have  not  been 
separately  allocated  from  the  freight  expenses  for  the  past 
years.  That  can  only  be  done  by  some  special  study  such 
as  has  been  made  in  this  case. 

Question.  So  that  as  a  matter  of  fact  your  charge  is  lack- 
ing with  respect  to  these  ratios  and  with  respect  to  the  ratios 
between  revenue  and  expense  for  every  service  concerned 
in  this  inquiry '( 

Answer.  Of  course  it  is  lacking  in  that  respect.  It  shows 
the  only  available  information  from  the  statistics  of  the 
Interstate  Commerce  Commission.      (R.  1 578-1 5S2.) 

RAILROAD  EXHIBIT  NO.  48.— THERE  IS  NO  NECESSARY 
RELATION  BETWEEN  THE  EXPENDITURES  FOR  THE 
TRANSPORTATION  OF  THE  MAILS  ON  RAILROADS 
AND  EXPENDITURES  FOR  OTHER  POSTAL  FUNC- 
TIONS. 

Mr.  WoKTHiNGTON  testified  on  cross-examination  as 
follows : 

Question  (by  Mr.  Stewart).  Now,  referring  to  your 
Exhibit  48.  This  represents  the  postal  receipts  and  ex- 
penditures froin  1900  to  1918,  inclusive.     You  have  there 


413 

columns  representing  total  revenues,  payments  to  the  rail- 
roads, and  pa^Tuents  made  by  the  Post  Office  Department 
for  the  conduct  of  the  several  branches  of  the  service,  such 
as  post  offices,  rural  deliverv,  Railway  Mail  Service,  and 
other  expenses,  total  excluding  ])a}nnents  to  railroads,  then 
you  have  percentages  stated  on  the  right. 

Answer.  Yes,  sir. 

Question.  Now,  in  describing  this  exhibit — and  I  men- 
tion this  because  I  am  somewhat  at  a  loss  to  know  why  it  is 
introduced,  and  want  to  get  your  reason  for  it — vou  said 
that  the  amount  of  postal  revenues  stated  thereon  shows 
the  ability  of  the  Post  Office  Department  to  pay  the  rail- 
roads more  for  the  mail  service:  that  is,  the  amount  stated 
in  this  second  column.  Now,  inasmuch  as  all  the  remaining 
revenues  substantiallv  are  paid  out  to  maintain  other  postal 
functions  that  are  indicated  on  this  exliibit,  will  you  please 
state  how  the  ability  to  pay  the  raikoads  is  shown  thereon  ? 

Answer.  It  did  not  seem  quite  logical  to  me  why  that 
pohcy  should  be  observed  that  the  railway  mail  payments 
should  suffer  to  the  benefit  of  the  other  expenses.  In  other 
words,  this  exhibit  shows  that  tlie  postal  revenues,  which 
themselves  are  dependent  on  the  weight  carried  and  on  the 
weight  carried  by  the  railroads  themselves  over  the  dis- 
tance having  sho\\'n  a  very  large  increase,  and  the  pay- 
ments made  to  the  raih-oads  a  ver\'  small  increase,  it  seemed 
tt)  follow  that  the  revenues  were  adequate  to  properly  com- 
pensate the  roads  in  accordance  witli  the  tonnage' which 
they  did  handle,  as  it  appears  at  the  beginning  of  the  period, 
36  per  cent  of  those  revenues  were  being  paid  to  the  rail- 
roads for  transportation,  and  at  the  conclusion  of  the  period, 
16  per  cent. 

Question.  Well,  that  is  just  a  statement  of  your  examina- 
tion in  chief.  I  will  put  the  question,  for  instance,  in  this 
way,  if  you  think  that  some  of  these  other  facilities  should 
be  curtailed  to  the  people,  and  if  so,  which  one  of  them,  for 
instance '.  The  rural  delivery  '.  You  mentioned  the  rural 
delivery  particularly. 

Answer.  I  simply  mention  the  rural  delivery  for  the  pur- 
pose of  comparison  to  indicate  that  for  that  service  alone, 
which  does  not  seem  as  great  a  service  as  what  the  railroads 
perform  in  carrying  the  mails  all  over  the  United  States, 
the  aggregate  payments  are  now  almost  as  large  as  the 
aggregate  payments  made  to  the  railroads  for  their  trans- 
portation, and  in  both  cases  being  a  trajisportation  pay- 
ment. A  rural  delivery  payment  is  also  a  payment  for 
transportation,  and  a  pa3'ment  to  the  railroad  is  for  trans- 
portation. Whether  the  postal  revenues  are  adequate  to 
pay  these  other  expenses  or  not,   they  certainly  appear 


414 

juloqiiatc,  so  far  as  their  increase  is  concerned,  to  pay  the 
railroads  ]>ro|)ortionately  to  their  services  as  expressed  by 
the  to]i-mileao;e  carried. 

Question.  Assuming  that  you  are  going  to  take  this  gross 
amount  and  divide  among  the  units  of  service  performed 
for  the  Post  Office  Department,  your  idea  is  that  the  rail- 
roads shoukl  receive  more  of  it  and  some  of  these  other 
services  should  receive  less? 

Answer.  Not  at  all,  Mr.  Stewart.  I  have  not  any  such 
idea  as  that.  I  do  not  want  to  limit  the  department  in 
their  payments  for  the  other  expenses,  but  I  do  think  that 
they  should  be  as  liberal  to  the  railroads  in  viewing  this 
matter  as  they  have  been  to  their  other  services. 

Question.  What  necessary  relation  is  there  between  ex- 
penditures for  transportation  on  the  railroads,  transporta- 
tion of  the  mails,  and  expenditures  for  the  other  functions 
mentioned  on  this  sheet  ? 

Answer.  I  don't  think  there  is  any  relation  particularly 
between  the  service  as  rendered  by  the  roads.  I  prepared 
this  chart  to  show  how  the  payments  to  the  railroads  had 
not  increased  as  had  the  other  expenses  and  as  had  the 
revenues. 

Question.  Precisely,  but  you  draw  a  certain  conclusion 
from  that,  at  least  by  inference,  and  now  I  am  asking  you 
to  justif}^  your  conclusion,  and  you  can  not,  for  instance, 
take  the  payments  to  the  railroads  and  the  payments  for 
maintaining  the  service  in  the  post  offices;  there  is  no 
possible  relation  between  them. 

Answer.  I  did  not  claim  there  was. 

Question.  Nor  is  there  between  that  and  the  rural 
delivery  ? 

Answer.  I  did  not  make  any  such  claim. 

Question.  There  might  be  a  slight  relation  between  the 
payments  to  railroads  and  the  payments  for  maintaining 
the  Railway  Mail  Service,  but  I  call  your  attention  to  this 
fact  and  ask  you  if  it  is  not  true  that  while  the  payments 
to  the  railroads  decreased  from  36  to  15,  the  payments  to 
maintain  the  Railway  Mail  Service  decreased  from  864  to 
836,  almost  constant  during  that  whole  period.  Is  that 
not  true  ? 

Answer.  They  remained  reasonably  constant.  The  per- 
centage paid  to  the  railroads  did  not  remain  reasonably 
constant.     That  was  cut  in  two. 

Question.  You  understand  the  Railway  Mail  Service 
would  not  increase  and  decrease  in  the  exact  ratio  that  the 
expenditures  would  increase  or  decrease  for  railway  mail 


415 

pay.  because  the  function  of  the  Railway  Mail  Service  is  to 
distribute  the  mails  on  the  trains  and  not  to  carry  the  mails  ? 

Answer.  Might  I  ask  a  question,  Mr.  Stewart?  Am  I 
correct,  that  part  of  the  increase  in  the  payments  for  Rail- 
way Mail  Service  have  been  due  to  increased  wages,  in  this 
item,  here,  which  increased  from  $8,000,000  to  §28,000,000  ? 

Question.  In  recent  years. 

Answer.  "Well,  we  have  the  same  thing  to  contend  with. 
Our  wages  are  going  up.  The  other  men  on  the  train  are 
being  paid  more. 

Question.  Notwithstanding  that  fact,  you  notice  that 
the  ratio  has  continued  almost  constant,  notwithstanding 
the  fact  that  the  department  has  been  compelled  to  pay 
very  largely  increased  salaries  to  railway  postal  clerks. 

Answer.  If  our  ratio  of  payments  had  remained  constant 
as  had  the  payments  to  the  Railway  Mail  Service  we  would 
have  been  more  than  satisfied.  If  we  had  also  received  the 
same  constant  ratio  and  earned  36  per  cent  of  the  pay  in 
1918  as  we  did  in  1900  we  would  have  received  over 
$100,000,000  for  carryhig  the  mail  in  place  of  $56,000,000. 

Question.  But  that  does  not  take  into  consideration  the 
other  side  of  the  ratio,  the  effect  that  has  on  the  cost  to 
perform  the  service. 

Now,  let  me  call  your  attention  to  the  fact,  passing  along 
over  these  special  cases,  we  have  here  the  ratio  expressed 
covering  all  other  expenditures,  in  your  next  to  the  last 
column  there,  and  j^our  ratios  there, 'your  per  cent  in  1900 
is  9.72,  and  it  dropped  to  7.01  in  1918. 

Answer.  I  don't  know  what  those  other  expenses  are. 
They  cover  a  multitude  of  things.  But  it  would  be  quite 
natural  that  with  a  very  large  growth  in  revenue  a  good 
many  of  those  expenses  ought  to  be  reasonably  constant, 
so  that  they  would  not  increase  in  the  same  degree  as  the 
volume  of  business.  I  do  not  know  what  those  items  are, 
but  I  do  not  think  that  is  a  material  point  in  this  considera- 
tion of  this  chart.     You  may  think  it  is. 

Question.  I  think  all  those  are  material.  You  have  ])ut 
them  up  on  your  chart,  and  3'ou  drew  certain  conclusions 
from  your  chart,  and  I  am  trying  to  find  out  whether  there 
is  anything  on  your  chart  that  sustains  your  conclusion 
now. 

Answer.  I  think  there  is.     (R.  1582-1587.) 


41C 

BAILROAD  EXHIBIT  NO.  48.  POSTAL  REQUIREMENTS 
FOR  TRANSPORTATION  DO  NOT  INCREASE  IN  THE 
RATIO  OF  INCREASE  IN  POSTAL  REVENUES;  THE 
FAULTY  CONCLUSIONS  FROM  THE  EXHIBIT. 

Mr.  WoKTiiiNGTON  testified  on  cross-examiiiatiou  as 
follows : 

Question  (by  Mr.  Stewart)  .  *  *  *  Let  me  ask  you 
whether  you  can  tell  me  what  mails  ])roduce  the  bulk  of 
the  postal  revenues — what  class  of  mails. 

Answer.  In  proportion  to  volume,  the  first-class  mail. 
I  don't  know  the  distribution  of  the  revenue  in  the  aggre- 
gate, Init  that  is  probably  true  as  to  the  aggregate.  You 
can  make  that  statement  better  than  I  can. 

Question.  First-class  mail? 

Answer.  First  class. 

Question.  Now,  what  necessary  relation,  if  it  be  your 
contention  that  there  is  any,  is  there  between  the  amount 
of  postal  revenues  and  the  amount  of  payments  that 
should  be  made  to  the  railroad  companies  for  transporting 
the  mails  ? 

Answer.  It  is  my  understanding  that  the  postal  reve- 
nues increase  in  proportion  to  the  weights  carried,  as 
postage  is  upon  a  w^eight  basis.  I  think  all  classes  of  post- 
age are  upon  a  weight  basis.  I  have  shown  in  another 
part  of  my  statement  that  the  mails,  as  expressed  by 
ton  mileage  in  volume  handled  by  the  railroads,  increased 
203  per  cent. 

Question.  Then  having  received  36  per  cent  of  the 
revenues  in  1900,  you  should  now  receive  36  per  cent  of 
the  revenues  in  1918? 

Answer.  I  have  not  made  that  contention  as  to  being 
the  exact  amount  we  should  receive  in  1918,  but  exhibits 
have  been  presented  indicating  that  we  ought  to  receive 
something  in  the  neighborhood  of  $95,000,000,  or 
$100,000,000,  I  believe. 

Question.  On  other  bases  ? 

Answer.  Yes. 

Question.  I  am  speaking  now  of  your  exhibit.  Now, 
inasmuch  as  the  bulk  of  the  revenue  is  derived  from 
first-class  mail,  let  me  ask  you  what  is  the  relation  of  the 
weight  or  bulk  of  that  mail  to  the  whole  weight  or  bulk 
of  all  the  mails? 

Answer.  As  I  stated  yesterday  the  percentage  of  first- 
class  mail  was  a  very  small  part  of  the  total  w^eight  of  the 
mail. 

Question.  Then  in  so  far  as  the  increase  in  weight  or 
bulk  of  first-class    mail    to  be    carried    on    the    railroads 


417 

necessarily  increased  any  railroad  service  and  pay,  it 
would  be  much  less  an  increase  in  proportion  than  the 
increase   in  revenues   derived  ? 

Answer.  That  is  not  necessarily  so,  Mr.  Stewart,  because 
while  that  mail  represents  only  a  small  part  of  the  ton- 
nage carried  by  the  roads,  it  represents  quite  a  large  part 
of  the  work  done  by  the  carriers,  particularly  in  the  dis- 
tributing cars. 

***** 

Question.  For  a  starting  point,  then,  we  will  assume 
your  date  of  1900,  and  we  will  assume — and  no  doubt  it 
will  be  conceded  to  be  true — that  the  facilities  in  postal 
cars  for  distributing  the  first-class  mail  were  adequate 
at  that  time.  Now,  you  would  have  admitted  that  the 
increase  in  the  weight  of  fixst-class  mail  which  would 
accrue  between  1900  and  1918  would  be  a  very  small 
proportion  of  the  total  weight  of  the  mails  *  *  * 
but  does  that  increase,  Mi*.  Worthington,  that  must  be 
provided  for  by  this  added  facility  in  the  distribution  car — 
would  not  that  increase  in  the  facility  be  proportionately 
small  as  the  weight  of  the  mail  first  class  is  proportionately 
small  ? 

Answer.  I  should  not  think  so,  Mr.  Stewart.  If  the 
percentage  or  rate  of  increase  in  first-class  mail  happened, 
for  example,  to  be  the  same  as  the  percentage  of  increase 
of  other  mail,  naturally  the  percentage  of  increase  in  the 
distributing  facility  ought  to  be  of  the  same  ratio  as  the 
percentage  of  increase  of  other  facilities.  Without  any 
knowledge  whatever  as  to  the  distribution  of  mail  between 
the  various  classes,  it  would  be  impossible  to  answer  a 
C[uestion  of  that  kind  exactly.     (R.  1587-1590.) 

Question.  Now,  let  me  ask  3-ou  what  class  of  mail  matter 
produces  the  next  greatest  part  of  the  postal  revenues. 

Answer.  I  don'tknow,  Mr.  Stewart.  Possibly  you  can 
give  that  information. 

Question.  Well,  I  think  we  might  agree  that  it  is  parcel 
post. 

Answer.  That  is  probably  true. 

Question.  Now,  in  all  your  testimony  you  have  assumed 
that  the  entire  weight  of  parcel  post  is  carried  on  the  rail- 
roads, have  you  not? 

Answer.  If  I  have  made  that  assumption,  it  is  probable— 
I  don't  thhik  I  have  made  that  assumption.  I  don't  thhik 
I  have  made  any  statement  of  that  kind.  I  think  I  stated 
that  tlie  total  weight  of  parcels  liandled,  as  shown  by  the 
reports  of  the  Postmaster  General,  are  a  certain  figure.  If 
I  did  make  the  assumption  that  aU  of  that  was  liandled 

122698—19 27 


k 


418 

on  the  railroads,  I  was  incorrect;  but  undoubtedly,  an 
extromcly  large  percentage  of  it  was  handled  on  the  rail- 
roads. 5jaturally  there  would  be  some  parcels  that  would 
be  handled  witliin  the  limits  of  large  cities.  Unquestion- 
ably there  are  a  great  many  of  them. 

*  *  *  *  * 

Question.  Now.  you    know,  however — -referring  to    my 
question  again — ^that  the  mail-order  houses  ship  their  stuff,  • 
which  afterwards  becomes   parcel   post,   by   express   and 
freight  for  long  distances  to  points  where  it  then  goes  into 
thc'mails  and  is  transported  by  short  hauls. 

Answer.  I  have  heard  that  statement.  I  don't  know 
anytliing  about  it. 

Question.  Well,  it  is  quite  common  knowledge,  is  it  not, 
so  far  as  your  information  goes  ? 

Answer.  I  have  heard  those  statements,  Mr.  Stewart;  yes. 

Question.  Referring  to  your  desire  to  know  the  amount 
of  parcel  post  which  reaches  the  railroads — and  I  will  say 
that  it  is  a  question  which  has  interested  many — do  you 
recall  that  after  the  passage  of  the  parcel  post  act,  Congress 
called  for  certain  information  with  respect  to  that  same 
subject,  and  passed  an  act  authorizing  the  department  to 
add  not  exceeding  5  per  cent  of  the  compensation  of  the 
raih'oads  to  their  pay  to  cover  the  increase  in  the  weight 
occasioned  by  tlie  introduction  of  the  Parcel  Post  System  ? 

Answer.  I  remember  that  particularly  because  of  the 
words  "not  exceeding." 

Question.  And  the  construction  put  upon  those  words 
by  the  department,  I  presume  ? 

Answer.  Yes. 

Question.  Well,  as  a  matter  of  fact,  Mr.  Worthington, 
the  department  actually  obtained  (R.  offered,  sic.)  statis- 
tics on  the  railroad  lines  on  that  occasion,  did  they  not, 
and  they  found  that  the  actual  weight  did  not  justify  the 
allowance  of  that  full  5  per  cent,  and  in  many  cases  they 
followed  out  the  direction  of  CongiTss  conveyed  in  those 
words  " '  not  exceeding  "  and  did  not  allow  the  full  5  per  cent  ? 

Answer.  Am  I  right,  Mr.  Stewart,  in  my  thought  that 
was  cpite  a  while  ago  ?  Do  you  remember  the  date,  as  to 
the  year  ? 

Question.  That  was  about  1913,  I  think;  the  first  act. 

Answer.  Well,  has  not  the  volume  of  parcel  post  increased 
tremendously  since  that  time?  The  reports  of  the  Post- 
master General  indicate  it  has. 

Question.  It  has.     Now  I  am  reaching  that. 

Answer.  That  law  was  March  4,  1913. 

Question.  The  Postmaster  General  afterwards  increased 
the  weight  limit  and  the  same  question  came  up  again. 


419 

Answer.  Yes, 

Question.  Wlietlier  the  railroads  were  adequately  com- 
pensated for  this  increase  of  weight  of  the  new  parcel  post 
arising  out  of  that  order,  which  reached  the  railroads,  and 
was  carried  thereon,  and  do  you  know  that  an  investigation 
was  made  and  that  the  results  of  the  same  were  submitted 
to  Congress,  and  that  Congress  authorized  the  addition  of 
one-half  of  1  per  cent  compensation  to  the  railroads  to 
compensate  them  for  that  increase  in  weight  ? 

Answer.  Yes;  I  think  that  was  also  some  years  ago, 

Mr.  Wood.  Are  you  going  to  supply  the  basic  figures, 
Mr.  Stewart,  and  allow  us  to  cross-examine? 

^Ir.  Stewart.  Well,  if  we  can  furnish  you  any  informa- 
tion that  will  be  helpful,  we  will  be  glad  to  do  it.  Those 
figures  are  all  m  the  department,  and  the  results  of  those 
figures  have  been  before  Congress,  and  have  resulted  in 
legislation,  and  I  assume  that  it  is  practically  a  closed 
matter.     I  wiU  be  glad  to  furnish  you  with  the  information. 

Answer.  Well,  is  it  not  true,  Mr.  Stewart,  that  there  is 
a  great  volume  of  parcel  post  handled  on  the  railroads  ? 

Question  (by  Mr.  Stewart).  There  is  a  great  deal  han- 
dled on  the  railroads,  but  I  am  calling  these  facts  to  your 
attention  to  indicate  that  notwithstanding  the  great  vol- 
ume of  increase,  the  great  increase  of  the  volume  of  parcel 
post,  comparatively  a  small  amount  of  it  reaches  the  rail- 
roads, and  produces  what  is  known  as  an  average  daily 
weight  over  the  entire  lines.  There  is  the  fact  out  of 
which  all  the  difficulty  m  estimating  the  effect  upon  the 
raih'oad  pay  has  arisen.  It  is  not  taking  into  consideration 
the  haul  of  this  stuff  before  it  reaches  the  railroad. 

Mr.  Wood.  Mr.  Examiner,  I  think  I  must  object  to  Mr, 
Stewart's  constant  habit  of  testifying  as  to  facts  in  his 
questions.  If  those  are  facts,  it  seems  to  me  they  ought 
to  be  established  by  witnesses  here  who  may  be  subject  to 
cross-examination . 

Attorney  Examhier  Brown.  The  objection  is  well  taken. 
Mr.  Stewart  will,  so  far  as  possible,  desist  from  testifying, 
if  he  has  been  doing  it. 

Answer.  I  stated  that  vesterday,  that  the  volume  of 
parcel  post  was  1,000,000  tons  or  2.000,000,000  pounds,  as 
shown  in  the  annual  renort  of  the  Postmaster  General  for 
1918. 

Question  (by  Mr.  Stewart).  And  the  purpose  of  my  in- 
quiry was  to  ehcit  if  you  kncM'  what  ])ro])ortion  of  that 
went  to  the  railroads  and  is  carried  u])on  them,  and  how  it 
affects  the  railway-mail  ])ay.  All  the  statements  I  have 
made  in  regard  to  my  ((uestions  I  think  were  largely  con- 


420 

fined  to  facts  that  are  matters  of  jiublic  record.  Any  state- 
ment I  have  made  outside  of  matters  of  ])ublic  record  I  will 
be  glad  to  produce  evidence  on.      (R.  1591-1597.) 

Now,  let  me  call  your  attention  to  the  next  class  of  mail 
that  produces  large  tonnage,  and  that  is  second  class,  and 
you  have  referred  to  that. 

Answer.  I  have  referred  to  the  volume  of  second-class 
matter  as  being,  as  I  recall,  1,320,000,000  (R.  1,320,000 
sic.)  pounds.     *     *     * 

Question.  The  revenue  from  that  is  very  small  compared 
with  the  revenue  for  weight  of  other  classes,  is  it  not  ?  This 
is  1  cent  a  pound,  if  I  may  be  allowed  to  state. 

Answer.  I  know  the  railroad  revenue  from  it  is  very 
small. 

Question.  *  *  *  we  are  discussing  here  your  second 
column,  postal  receipts. 

*  *  *  :f;  * 

Question.  I  will  ask  you  the  same  c^uestion  I  did  about 
first-class  matter,  that  the  facilities  for  caring  for  the  dis- 
tribution of  second-class  matter,  so  far  as  it  is  distributed 
on  the  cars,  were  practically  provided  for,  at  least  to  the 
extent  of  caring  for  the  service,  with  the  beginning  of  your 
table  here,  so  that  the  additions  to  the  weight  of  second- 
class  matter,  in  so  far  as  that  second-class  matter  is  dis- 
tributed in  the  distributing  car,  would  rec^uire  only  slight 
additions  to  those  facilities  ? 

Answer.  I  can  not  agree  to  that,  Mr.  Stewart,  because  I 
am  not  familiar  or  I  don't  think  there  is  any  record  of  the 
average  tonnage  per  car  in  1900.     *     *     *     (R.  1597-1600.) 

RAILROAD  EXHIBIT  NO.  49.— THE  RAILROAD  TESTIMONY 
AS  TO  RATES  BEING  NOT  EXCESSIVE  IN  1898  WAS 
PREDICATED  ON  THE  WOLCOTT  COMMISSION  REPORT 
AND  ENTIRELY  OMITTED  MENTION  OF  THE  PENROSE- 
OVERSTREET  COMMISSION,  17  YEARS  LATER,  RECOM- 
MENDING CERTAIN  REDUCTION  ACTED  UPON  BY 
CONGRESS. 

Mr.  WoRTHiNGTON  testified  on  cross-examination  as  fol- 
lows: 

Question  (by  Mr!  Stewart).  Referring  now  to  your 
Exhibit  Xo.  49,  the  graphic  illustration  of  the  trend  of 
postal  receipts  and  expenditures  and  percentage  of  total 
postal  receipts  paid  to  railroads — and  in  that  connection 
you  fiuoted  from,  I  think,  the  Wolcott  commission.  You 
said  that  in  1873  the  ton-mile  rate  was  stated  to  have  been 
26.42  cents,  and  then  your  figures  were  given  for  1880  and 


-1:^1 

1890  and  1S9S.     In  that  last  instance  it  was  given  as  12.57 
cents.     Those  were  very  high  ton  rates,  were  they  not  ? 

Answer.  Not  for  the  service  rendered,  Mr.  Stewart,  and 
considering  a  ton-mile  rate  a])])lied  to  the  mail  I  think 
consideration  should  always  be  given  to  the  })resence  of 
the  duty  upon  the  carrier  of  transporting  a  traveling  ])Ost 
ofHce  which  carries  very  little  weight  and  where  the  loading 
capacity  of  the  car  is  extremely  limited.  So  I  would  not 
regard  those  ton-mile  rates  as  high  when  that  factor  is 
taken  into  consideration. 

Question.  They  were  produced  by  a  sliding  scale  fixed 
under  the  weight  statute,  were  they  not? 

Answer.  Yes,  sir. 

***** 

Question.  Now,  having  mentioned  the  Wolcott  commis- 
sion's conclusion  or  recommendation,  you  knew,  did  you 
not,  that  another  congressional  commission  in  1907,  sev- 
enteen years  after  that,  stated  a  conclusion  which  was 
directly  the  opposite  ? 

Answer.  What  congressional  commission  do  you  refer 
to? 

Answer  (by  Mr.  Stewart).  The  commission  on  the  rec- 
ommendation of  which  the  statute  of  1907  was  passed 
reducing  the  rate. 

***** 

The  Witness.  I  am  not  familiar  with  any  report  of  the 
Penrose  commission  about  1907.  It  seems  to  have  escaped 
my  attention  absolutely. 

Question  (by  Mr.  Stewart),  Well,  you  don't  know  that 
fact? 

Answer.   No;  I  don't. 

Question.  That  it  was  upon  the  recommendation  of  that 
commission  that  the  statute  was  passed — the  statute  of 
1907? 

Answer.  What  statute  do  you  refer  to? 

Question.  Reducing  the  rates  to  railroad  companies 
carrying  over  48,000  pounds  average  daily  weight. 

Answer.  Oh,  you  are  not  speaking  now  of  this  last  space 
basis  ? 

Question.   No. 

Answer.  You  mean  the  percentage  reduction  of  1907. 
I  do  know  those  reductions  were  made,  but  I  am  not 
familiar  with  the  circumstances  surrounding  ii.  I  think 
they  were  very  unfortunate,  however.     (11.  1600-1603.) 


422 

RAILROAD  EXHIBIT  NO.  52.— THE  RAILROADS  ALWAYS 
RECEIVED  THE  MAXIMUM  RATE  OF  PAY  FOR  MAILS 
PROVIDED  BY  STATUTE. 

Ml".  WoKTiiiNGTON  testified  on  cross-examination  as 
follows  : 

Question  (by  Mr.  Stewart).  Referring  now,  to  your  line 
indicating  receipts  for  the  carriage  of  mail,  notwithstanding 
all  those  changes  in  your  line,  it  is  true,  is  it  not,  that  the 
companies  receive  the  maximum  unit  rate  for  the  author- 
ized service,  authorized  maximum  unit  rate  provided  by 

the  statute 

***** 

Answer.  Well,  we  did  receive  the  maximum  rates  for 
the  minimum  load.  I  will  admit  that,  I  mean  the  maxi- 
mum rate  for  the  maximum  load.  I  should  say  we  had 
also  the  minimum  rate.  Also,  the  minimum  rate  for  the 
maximum  load. 

Question.  I  understand  that.  We  differ,  of  course,  on 
the  question  of  adec{uacy. 

Answer.  Yes;  there  is  not  much  use  of  discussing  it. 
(R.  1605,  1606.) 

RAILROAD  EXHIBIT  NO.  55.— FIGURES  STATED  AS  TO 
PAY  ON  BASIS  OF  APRIL,  1917,  WEIGHING,  DO  NOT 
REPRESENT  ACTUAL  READJUSTMENT. 

Ml'.  WoRTHiNGTON  testified  on  cross-examination  as 
follows : 

Question  (by  Mr.  Stewart)  ,  Now,  referring  to  your  Ex- 
hibit 55,  there  is  only  one  point  there  I  think  should  be 
cleared  up  in  your  testimony,  not  admitting,  however,  your 
conclusions  by  stating  that.  Refer  to  your  column  headed 
"Annual  pay  on  basis  of  weighing,  April,  1917."  I  think 
I  understood  you  to  state  that  that  does  not  represent  any 
adjustment  which  was  made  at  all  upon  those  weights,  but 
represents  only  the  amount  which  vrould  have  been  received 
if  adjustment  had  been  madp  at  the  maximum  rates. 

Answer.  That  is  true,  Mr.  Stewart,  because  the  weight 
basis  was  not  in  effect.     (R.  1606,  1607.) 


I 


423 

RAILROAD  EXHIBIT  NO.  4.— MR.  WETTLING'S  PER  CENT 
INCREASE  IN  OPERATING  COSTS  1918  OVER  1917, 
ALTHOUGH  BEING  A  PER  CENT  REPRESENTING 
TOTAL  AGGREGATE  INCREASE  FOR  BOTH  FREIGHT 
AND  PASSENGER  SERVICE.  IS  APPLIED  TO  ESTI- 
MATED COST  OF  MAIL  CAR-MILE,  NOTWITHSTAND- 
ING ALSO  THE  FACT  THAT  MANY  PASSENGER  TRAINS 
WERE  ABANDONED  DURING  1918. 

Mr.  Wettlixg  testified  en  direct  examination  as  fol- 
lows : 

Question  (by  Attorney  Examiner  Beown),  Well,  you 
took  into  no  account,  of  course,  or  you  did  not  make  the 
division  that  in  the  fall  of  1918  and  during  the  year  1918 
there  was  considerable  abandonment  of  passenger  service 
throughout  the  country? 

Answer.  No,  sir;  I  did  not.  I  just  took  the  average 
train-mile  costs  for  the  entire  country  as  a  whole. 

Question.  And  there  was  a  large  abandonment  ? 

Answer.  Oh,  yes.     (R.  1060.). 

REVENUE  AND  COST  STATISTICS. 

OPERATING  REVENUES,  OPERATING  EXPENSES.  OTHER 
EXPENDITURES  OUT  OF  OPERATING  REVENUES.  AND 
NET  INCOME  (FOR  THE  MONTH  OF  APRIL,  1917^  FOR 
PASSENGER,  EXPRESS,  AND  MAIL. 

POST  OFFICE  DEPARTMENT  EXHIBIT  66  (FOR  ALL  CAR- 
RIERS FOR  WHICH  NECESSARY  DATA  WAS  SECURED) 
AND  EXHIBIT  67  (FOR  ALL  CLASS  I  CARRIERS  FOR 
WHICH  THE  NECESSARY  DATA  WAS  SECURED). 

Mr.  Prentiss,  an  accountant  of  the  Post  Office  Depart- 
ment, testified  on  direct  examination  as  follows: 

Question  (by  Mr.  Stewart)  .  Mr.  Prentiss,  I  call  your 
attention  to  Post  Office  Department  Exhibits  Nos.  66  and 
67,  being  recapitulations  (R.  regulations,  sic.)  of  certain 
statistical  facts  evidenced  upon  the  financial  reports  made 
by  the  railroad  companies  and  certain  statistical  deduc- 
tions made  by  the  dc])artnient  thereon.  Did  you  have 
supervision  of  the  handling  of  these  financial  reports  made 
by  the  railroad  companies  upon  which  these  two  exhibits 
are  based  ? 

Answer.  I  did.     (R.  542,  543.) 


424 

REPORTS  COMPARED  WITH  REPORTS  TO  INTERSTATE 
COMMERCE  COMMISSION. 

Question.  Will  you  go  over  briefly  the  su])ject,  detailing 
or  describing  the  manner  in  which  those  reports  were  han- 
dled, mentioning  the  instructions  issued  by  the  department 
in  connection  therewith  ? 

Answer.  The  information  submitted  by  the  carriers  on 
Forms  K.  M.  P.  50  to  55,  inclusive,  for  the  month  of  April, 
1917 

Question.  Let  me  ask  you  right  there,  Mr.  Prentiss, 
whether  those  forms  have  been  submitted;  included  in  an 
exhibit  ? 

Answer.  They  are  included  in  department's  Exhibit  No. 
27,  giving  all  the  forms  that  were  sent  to  and  with  which 
the  carriers  are  more  or  less  familiar. 

Question.  Go  ahead. 

Answer.  These  statistics  were  for  the  month  of  April, 
1917,  and  they  were  compared  by  taking  transcripts  from 
the  reports  to  "the  Interstate  Commerce  Commission  for  the 
same  month,  and  any  differences  between  the  reports  on 
Forms  50  and  51,  containing  these  Interstate  Commerce 
Commission  figures,  and  the  reports  to  the  commission, 
were  reconciled  by  correspondence  with  the  carriers. 
(R.  543.) 

THE  DIRECTLY  ALLOCATED  AMOUNTS. 

The  directly  allocated  amounts  on  Forms  50  to  52,  in 
columns  4  and  5,  the  directly  allocated  expenses  provided 
by  the  commission's  separation  to  freight  and  passenger, 
respectively,  were  taken  as  reported  b_v  the  carriers,  or,  in 
a  few  cases,  modified  by  them  through  corres])ondence  with 
the  department.  The  directly  allocated  amounts  in 
columns  4,  5,  and  6  for  the  passenger,  express,  and  mail 
services  on  Forms  54,  series  54  A  to  D,  inclusive,  were 
taken  as  reported  by  the  carriers,  with  a  few  exceptions, 
the  principal  changes  being  those  adjustments  made  to 
conform  to  the  treatment  of  the  items  by  the  committee 
representing  the  railroads  and  the  department's  opinion 
in  regard  to  certain  accounts.     (R.  543,  544.) 

EXAMINATION  OF  STATEMENT  OF  REVENUES  AND  SEPA- 
RATION OF  OPERATING  EXPENSES. 

A  careful  examination  was  made  of  the  revenues  and  of 
the  separation  of  operating  expenses  in  accordance  with 
Letter  of  Instruction  No.  504  sent  to  the  carriers  under 
date  of  August  5,  1918,  in  order  to  bring  them  into  accord 
with  this  letter. 

***** 


425 

The  Witness.  In  addition  to  the  audit  in  regard  to 
Letter  504,  there  was  made  an  examination — a  test,  as  it 
were — for  accuracy  of  certain  of  the  primary  accounts  as 
divided  under  the  rules  of  the  Interstate  Commerce  Com- 
mission for  separation  of  operating  expenses  between 
freight  and  passenger  service.  That  is  embraced  in  col- 
umns 6  and  7  on  Forms  50  and  51.  In  some  cases  the 
application  of  this  test  produced  considerable  differences 
in  the  results,  which  were  brought  to  the  attention  of  the 
companies,  with  a  request  that  an  explanation  be  made, 
and  in  case  the  results  did  not  differ  material^  from  the 
amounts  reported  by  the  carrier,  or  in  case  the  company 
furnished  a  suitable  explanation,  the  data  was  accepted 
without  change. 

Question  (by  Attorney  Exaniner  Browx).  Xow,  let  me 
undei-stand  this:  In  the  division  of  this  passenger,  freight, 
mail,  and  express,  have  the  department  and  the  railroads 
reached  an  agreement  upon  the  basis  ? 

Answer.  Practically. 

Question.  Practically? 

Answer.  "We  differ  in  regard  to  some  few  of  the  primary 
accounts. 

Mr.  Stewaet.  Mr.  Examiner,  we  endeavored  to  reach  an 
agreement  with  reference  to  the  handling  of  these  reports 
which  would  enable  us  to  come  before  the  commission  with 
a  result  which  would  remove  from  controversy,  as  to  its 
accuracy,  substantially  reserving  to  each  side  the  right  to 
submit  to  the  commission  their  own  theories  with  reference 
to  the  handling  of  individual  accounts.  Is  that  correct. 
Ml-.  Wood  ^ 

Mr.  Wood.  That  is  correct,  sir.     (R.  544-546.) 

i^.TTEMPT  ON  THE  PABT  OF  THE  DEPARTMENT  IN  CO- 
OPERATION WITH  THE  RAILROADS  TO  REACH  AN 
ASCERTAINMENT  AS  TO  THE  COST  OF  MAIL  SERVICE. 

Question  (by  Attorney  Exa^i>iner  Bkowx).  Then  the 
sum  and  substance  of  these  Exhibits  Xos.  66  and  67  is 
an  attempt  upon  the  part  of  the  Post  OfFice  Departirent.  in 
cooperation  with  the  railroads,  to  reach  a  determination 
as  to  the  cost  of  mail  service.     Is  that  right  ? 

Mr.  Stewart.  As  to  the  statistical  ascertainment  of  such 
cost. 

Attorney  Examiner  Brown.  Yes. 

Mr.  Stewart.  Of  course,  we  may  wish  to  suggest  to  the 
commission  that  certain  statistical  ascertainments  might 
not  fairly  represent  cost  in  all  cases,  but  for  the  practical 
purposes  referred  to  by  you.  I  think  that  is  correct. 


42C 

Mr.  Wood.  Well,  at  least,  this  is  correct,  Mr.  Stewart, 
that  they  represent  an  attempt  to  put  up  what  may  be 
rcfrardedas  the  primary  statistics  rehitive  to  the  cost  of  the 
two  classes  of  service  on  a  uniform  basis,  with,  as  Mr. 
Stewart  has  said,  the  right  reserved  to  either  side  to  claim 
that  the  basis  of  distribution  employed  in  those  uniform 
statistics  was  improper,  with  respect  to  certain  accounts. 
In  other  words,  1  do  not  understand  that  the  Post  Office 
Depart-nent  is  concluded  by  the  statistical  study,  nor  that 
the  railroad  com.panies  are,  as  to  the  use  of  all  the  figures 
that  were  employed  in  getting  at  the  uniform  statistics. 

Mr.  Stewart.  I  think  that  is  substantially  correct.  (R. 
546,  547.) 

AMOUNT    OF    OPERATING    EXPENSES     SEPARATED    TO 
PASSENGER  FOR  CLASS  I  CARRIERS. 

The  Witness.  The  separation  of  the  operating  expenses 
for  class  1  carriers  between  passenger  and  freight  service 
is  shown  on  recapitulation  No.  67,  at  coluirn  6,  for  item  1  ] , 
the  am^ount  of  $52,293,015.71.  That  a^nount  is  co-^iparable 
with  the  amount  which  has  been  furnished  in  advance  by 
the  carriers  to  the  departn:ent,  and  including  a  figure  of 
$50,756  to  this  total  which  I  have  just  read,  there  is  a  differ- 
ence of  only  $12,390  between  the  department  and  the  rail- 
roads in  regard  to  the  passenger  operating  expenses,  which 
is  less  than  .03  of  1  per  cent.      (R.  547.) 

DEVIATIONS  FROM  INSTRUCTIONS. 

Attention  should  be  called,  however,  to  some  deviations 
from  the  instructions  in  submitting  these  reports,  which 
the  department  was  not  able  to  eliminate  because  of  the 
manner  in  which  the  statistics  were  furnished  by  the  rail- 
road companies. 

A  case  in  point  was  the  Ann  Arbor  Railroad  Co.,  which 
separated  the  maintenance  of  way  and  structure  costs  by 
the  use  of  locomotive  ton-mileage.  They  practically 
separated  the  whole  amount  on  locomotive  ton-mileage 
and  placed  the  total  in  columns  6  and  7,  contrary  to  the 
instructions  of  letter  504.  It  was  impossible,  of  course, 
for  the  department  to  change  those.  They  could  handle 
one  or  two  of  the  accounts,  where  the  percentages  were 
obtainable;  but  otherwise  they  had  to  take  that,  and 
that  is  included  in  the  statistics,  the  additional  charge  to 
passenger  service. 

The  Alabama  Great  Southern  used  ratios  for  passenger 
and  freight  separations  for  yard  expenses  over  100  per 
per  cent  higher  than  their  ratio  fo]-  locomotive  switching 
miles,  as  shown  on  Form  53.     A  large  number  of  reports 


427 

were  defective  in  this  respect.  A  very  casual  examina- 
tion of  the  reports  proved  that  the  carriers  used  some 
other  percentage  than  the  percentage  of  locomotive 
switching  miles  for  the  month  of  April;  and  it  was  pre- 
sumed that  they  used  the  annual  switching  miles,  which 
are  recommended  by  the  commission  to  he  used  in  their 
rules  and  of  course  knight  or  might  not  be  apphcable  to 
the  month  of  April. 

In  nearly  every  case  of  this  kind  the  passenger  charges 
were  increased  by  the  use  of  a  higher  percentage  to  pas- 
senger. 

The  Delaware  &  Hudson  Co.  used  train-mileage  ratios 
for  dividing  the  yard  expenses.  Thes5  produced  results 
entirely  out  of  harmony  with  the  cost  of  the  yard  opera- 
tions for  freight  and  passenger  service.  They  had  no 
locomotive  switching  miles  on  Form  53,  and  I  understand 
the  department  took  the  matter  up  with  the  company, 
and  we  have  heard  nothing  from  them  in  regard  to  it;  so  I 
suppose  they  were  not  able  to  furnish  any  further  informa- 
tion. 

The  New  York  Central  Railroad  Co.  reported  the  oper- 
ating expenses  according  to  previous  practice,  which 
differed  from  the  rules  of  the  Interstate  Commerce  Com- 
mission providing  for  freight  and  passenger  separations. 
It  was  impossible  to  verify  these  results.  The  figure  was 
very  large,  and  it  would  take  an  examination  of  the  actual 
accounts  themselves  to  determine  what  the  difference 
might  be. 

The  Pennsylvania  lines  west,  in  submitting  reports  on 
Forms  54  A  to  D,  which  give  the  allocations  for  passenger, 
express,  and  mail  services,  made  apportionments  instead 
of  allocations,  based  on  measurements  of  space  occupied 
for  station  and  joint  facilities  maintenance  expenses,  and 
when  the  department  asked  them  for  an  explanation, 
they  stated  that  the  method  was  one  which  was  executed 
by  their  officers  in  the  field,  according  to  certain  rules, 
but  that  they  could  not  submit  the  actual  figures  for  veri- 
fication. They  also  used  time  studies  for  apportionment 
of  accounts  for  station  employees  and  station  supplies 
and  expenses  on  the  same  form.  Excessive  mail  charges 
were  produced,  due  in  a  measure  to  the  method  of  appor- 
tionment, which  ignored  all  the  unoccujMcd  time  and 
charged  to  mail  service  approximately  30  per  cent  of  their 
passenger-operating  expenses  for  the  allocated  account. 

The  Pennsylvania  Railroad  Co.  apportioned  to  passenger 
service  for  account  No.  373  (station  employees)  an  amount 
which  exceeded  by  approximately  !!;35,d00  the  amount 
called  for  by  the  rule  of  the  cornmission,   and   this  was 


428 

practically  100  per  cent  of  the  amount  which  the  rule  of 
the  commission  would  have  produced.  It  was  ex])lained 
by  the  company  that  this  was  due  to  accounting  by  divi- 
sions. 

Now,  these  differences  to  which  I  have  called  attention 
have  not  been  corrected.  It  is  impossible  to  correct  them, 
and  we  had  to  take  the  figures  as  thev  stand  on  the  reports. 

In  handling  the  Class  II  and  Class  III,  the  carriers' 
reports,  only  those  reports  were  taken  in  which  an  attempt 
was  made  to  render  the  reports  in  accordance  with  the 
Letter  of  Instruction  No.  504,  and  for  which  the  space 
ratios  secured  froiji  the  results  on  Forms  R.  M.  P.  Nos.  1 
to  4  were  included  in  the  department's  recapitulations 
on  Forms  70  and  71.     (R.  547-550.) 

Question  (by  Mr.  Wood).  Well,  do  you  regard  it  as 
a  serious  matter,  affecting  the  value  of  these  statistics 
that  you  have  offered  here? 

Answer.  Not  at  all.  I  simply  place  them  in  evidence 
as  showing  that  there  is  in  our  total  figure  for  the  pas- 
senger-operating expenses  an  item  for  these  roads  repre- 
senting additional  expenditures.      (R.  584.)    . 

WORKING  SHEET. 

In  Post  Office  Department  Exhibit  No.  27  there  is 
included  the  working  sheet  (Form  R.  M.  P.  56),  which  was 
the  statement  by  means  of  which  the  department  pro- 
duced results  found  in  plans  Nos.  1  and  2.  It  was  a  work- 
ing form,  gathering  together  the  statistics  on  Forms  50, 
51^^  and  54,  and  in  such  shape  that  they  could  be  put  onto 
Forms  70  and  71,  Exhibits  66  and  67. 

RECAPITULATION  OF  FORM  70  (SECOND  PART  OF  EACH 
POST  OFFICE  DEPARTMENT  EXHIBITS  66  AND  67). 
Form  R.  M.  P.  No.  70,  which  we  have  here  as  the  second 
part  of  each  of  these  exhibits,  gives  the  car-miles  and  car- 
foot  miles  at  the  head  of  the  sheet,  as  recapitulated  on 
Form  301,  Post  Office  Department  Exhibit  No.  36,  and 
I  elow  this  are  the  revenues  and  expenses  for  the  month  of 
April,  together  with  the  investment  in  property  reported 
to  the  commission  for  the  year  ending  December  31,  1916. 
That  is  at  the  bottom  of  the  sheet.     (R.  550,  551.) 
***** 

Form  71  is  practically  taken  from  Form  70;  so  that  if 
we  describe  Form  70  it  will  also  describe  Form  71 .    (R.  551.) 

(A)  CAR-MILES;   ITEMS  1  TO  3. 

The  car-miles  entered  for  item  No.  1  were  obtained, 
as  explained  in  Post  Office  Department  Exhibit  No.  64, 
apportionment  of  car-miles  in  mixed  cars  and  the  ascer- 


429 

tainment  of  total  oar-milos  in  each  class  of  service  for 
department  plans  Xos.   1  and  2.      (R.  551.) 

The  entries  for  item  Xo.  2  on  Form  70  are  six-sevenths  of 
the  car-miles  entered  for  item  No.  1;  that  is,  the  period  of 
April  to  correspond  with  the  statistics  for  the  month  of  April. 
We  took  six-sevenths  of  the  car-miles  for  the  period  from 
March  27  to  April  30. 

There  were  exceptions  to  this  rule  for  the  St.  Louis  & 
San  Francisco  Railroad,  the  St.  Louis,  San  Francisco  & 
Texas  Railway  Co.,  the  Fort  Worth  &  Rio  Grande  Railway 
Co.,  and  the  Brownwood  North  &  South  Railway  Co. 
These  companies  rendered  passenger-train  reports  for  the 
month  of  April  only,  and  consequently  it  was  not  neces- 
sary to  take  the  six-sevenths. 

The  car-miles  for  freight  and  passenger  services  entered 
for  item  No.  3  were  tabulated  from  the  reports  of  the 
carriers  rendered  on  Form  53,  as  explained  in  Letter  of 
Instruction  No.  504,  furnished  to  the  interested  companies 
on  August  5,  1918.     (R.  551,  552.) 

(B)  CAR-FOOT  MILES;  ITEMS  4  AND  5,  AND  PER  CENTS. 

The  car-foot  miles  entered  for  item  No.  4  were  obtained 
from  the  reports  of  the  several  carriers  on  Forms  R.  M.  P. 
Nos.  1  to  4,  inclusive,  and  recapitulated  on  Form  R.  M.  P, 
No.  301,  the  unauthorized  and  unused  space  assignment 
having  been  made  as  explained  in  Post  Office  Department 
Exhibit  No.  65,  setting  forth  the  manner  of  assigning  and 
apportioning  the  unauthorized  and  unused  space  tabulated 
on  Form  R.  M.  P.  No.  301. 

The  entries  for  item  No.  5  are  six-sevenths  of  the  car- 
foot  mile  entries  shown  for  item  No.  4,  with  the  exception 
of  the  several  companies  hereinbefore  named. 

The  percentages  shown  in  columns  9,  11,  and  13  for 
plans  Nos.  1  and  2  on  Form  70  were  obtained  by  dividing 
the  total  car-foot  miles  for  each  class  of  service  by  the  total 
car-foot  miles  for  all  classes  reported  in  the  passenger 
trains  of  each  carrier  rendering  a  separate  financial  report. 

The  ratios  for  the  several  classes  of  service  thus  per- 
centaged  were  used  to  apportion  to  passenger,  express,  and 
mail  services  the  unallocated  passenger  train  expenses 
reported  on  Form  R.  M.  P.  No.  54,  as  explained  hereinafter, 
and  also  for  the  apportionment  of  unallocated  amounts  for 
passenger  eciuipment  property  investment,  the  equipment 
apportioimient  being  explained  hereinafter.     (R.  552,  553.) 

(C)  INCOME  ACCOUNT;  ITEMS  7  TO  20. 

The  income  accounts,  items  No.  7  to  No.  20,  inclusive, 
were  tabulated  from  Forms  Nos.  50  to  o'),  inclusive. 


430 

The  revenues,  item  No.  7,  were  obtained  from  Form 
R.  M.  P.  No,  50,  with  adjustments  exphiined  in  Letter  of 
Instruction  No.  504,  page  1.  In  explanation  of  the 
several  amounts  entered  in  column  14,  Form  R.  M.  P.  No. 
70,  and  column  12  on  Forms  R.  M.  P.  No.  50  and  No.  51, 
it  was  provided  that  the  revenues  and  expenses  for  water- 
line  transi^ortation,  the  commercial  operations  of  the 
carriers  which  were  not  involved  in  railroad  transportation, 
and  such  other  amounts  as  covered  expenses  necessary  in 
connection  with  this  case,  should  be  considered  as  unrelated 
to  this  inquiry,  in  order  to  furnish  a  uniform  basis  for 
handling  the  accounts.     (R.  553.) 

OPERATING  EXPENSES;  ITEMS  8  TO  11.  RAILWAY  TAX 
ACCRUALS,  ETC.,  AND  OTHER  INCOME  ACCOUNTS 
AND  DEDUCTIONS  THEREFROM. 

The  entries  for  items  Nos.  8,  9,  10,  and  11,  covering 
operating  expenses  on  Form  R.  M.  P.  No.  70,  and  taken 
from  Forms  R.  M.  P.  No.  51a  to  5 Id — the  entries  for  those 
items  in  column  3,  Form  70,  are  those  reported  by  the 
carriers  to  the  Interstate  Commerce  Commission  for  the 
month  of  April,  1917,  with  few  exceptions,  due  to  the 
changes  made  necessary  by  the  adjustment  of  charges 
under  the  Adamson  law,  as  provided  in  Letter  of  Instruc- 
tion No.  504. 

The  entries  in  columns  4  and  6,  on  Form  No.  70,  were 
obtained  from  Forms  R.  M.  P.  Nos.  51  A  to  D,  inclusive, 
as  follows: 

The  amounts  entered  for  item  No.  8,  Form  70,  are  the 
totals  of  columns  4  and  5  on  Form  No.  51,  giving  direct 
allocations  to  freight  and  passenger  services  as  reported  by 
the  carriers. 

The  entries  for  items  No.  9  in  columns  4  and  6,  Form  70, 
are  the  totals  for  columns  6  and  7  on  Form  R,  M.  P.  No.  51 
giving  the  apportionments  to  freight  and  passenger  services 
in  accordance  with  the  rules  of  the  Interstate  Commerce 
Commission,  governing  the  separation  of  the  operating 
expenses  between  passenger  and  freight  services,  effective 
July  1,  1915. 

The  entries  for  item  No.  10,  in  columns  4  and  6,  Form  70, 
are  the  totals  for  columns  10  and  11,  Form  R.  M.  P.  No.  51, 
giving  the  total  freight  and  passenger  amounts  respectivelv 
secured  in  accordance  with  the  Letter  of  Instruction  No. 
504,  dated  August  5,  1918,  pages  2  and  3, 

The  amounts  entered  for  items  Nos.  8  and  10  in  columns 
8,  10,  and  12,  for  plan  No.  1  and  plan  No,  2,  were  obtained 
from  Form  R.  M,  P.  No.  56. 


431 

The  entries  for  item  No.  8  are  the  directly  allocated 
amounts  for  passenger,  express,  and  mail  services  and  are 
the  same  for  each  class  of  service  on  both  plans.  They 
were  reported  by  the  carriers  on  Forms  R.  M.  P.  Nos.  54 
A  to  D,  inclusive,  with  the  exception  of  any  allocated 
amounts  for  Accounts  Nos.  420  (injuries  to  persons),  and 
459  (valuation  expenses),  the  former  being  apportioned  in 
every  instance  upon  uniform  ratios  agreed  upon  by  the  rail- 
roads and  the  department,  for  the  purpose  of  this  inquiry,  in 
order  to  provide  a  uniform  basis  for  handling  this  account. 

The  Witness.  Account  No.  459  (valuation  expenses), 
was  treated  as  not  related  for  the  same  reason,  and  this 
account  eliminated  from  Form  51,  in  columns  4,  5,  6,  7, 
10,  and  11,  and  entered  in  column  12,  and  of  course  we 
eliminated  it  from  the  passenger  charge  in  column  3  on 
Form  54. 

The  Witness.  *  *  *  it  might  be  explained  that  the 
entries  for  item  No.  10,  in  columns  8,  10,  and  12,  are  the  ap- 
portioned charges  for  each  class  of  service.  The  total  in 
each  class  is  the  result  of  an  apportionment  for  *  *  * 
each  individual  company  of  the  undivided  passenger  ex- 
penses, using  the  car-foot  mile  ratios  entered  at  item  No.  4, 
together  with  any  other  apportioned  results  from  Accounts 
Nos.  317,  318,  319,  and  420.  The  Accounts  Nos.  317,  318, 
and  319  were  handled  in  accordance  with  Letter  of  In- 
struction No.  504,  and  if  the  company  made  complete  allo- 
cations to  the  passenger,  express,  and  mail,  or  to  any  one 
service,  in  other  words,  if  the  unapportioned  or  unallo- 
cated amount  was  for  mixed  cars  only,  the  ratios  for  mixed 
car-foot  miles  were  used  as  the  divisor,  instead  of  the  total 
car-foot  miles. 

The  entries  for  items  Nos.  13,  14,  and  18,  in  columns  3,  4, 
and  6,  are  the  amounts  reported  by  the  carriers  on  Form 
R.  M.  P.  No.  52. 

The  amount  of  Federal  income  taxes  was  entered  in  col- 
umn 14,  Form  No.  70,  and  the  total  unallocated  remainder 
of  amount  for  item  No.  13  was  apportioned  in  ratio  with  the 
total  operating  expenses  as  separated.  The  Federal  income 
taxes  were  deemed  to  be  unrelated  to  this  inquiry. 

The  imcollectible  railway  revenues  were  apportioned  by 
use  of  the  same  ratios  as  for  railway  tax  accruals,  and  also 
the  balances  for  equipment  and  johit  facility  rents,  item 
No.  18,  were  treated  in  the  same  way.  Item  No.  16  was 
considered  as  not  related  to  the  inquiry.  That  is  miscella- 
neous operating  income,  covering,  as  it  docs,  the  net  return 
from  the  miscellaneous  operatuig  physical  property,  which 
is  not  directly  involved  with  transportation  operations. 


482 

The  othci-  income,  amounts  and  deductions  therefrom, 
item  No.  19,  wore  likewise  treated  as  not  related,  in  order 
to  make  a  comparison  of  the  net  transportation  income  with 
the  investment  in  the  transportation  property  (road  and 
equipment). 

The  ratios  for  the  total  operating  expenses,  as  given  on 
Form  No.  70,  item  No,  11,  cohimns  9,  11,  and  13,  were  used 
for  the  ascertainment  of  the  passenger,  express,  and  mail 
proportions  chargeahle  under  etvch  plan  for  items  13  and  IS. 
Item  No.  14  (uncollectible  railway  revenues)  was  treated 
as  exclusively  passenger,  as  will  be  seen  on  Form  No.  70, 
on  account  of  the  nature  of  these  charges  which  do  not  per- 
tain to  express  or  mail  services.     (R.  553-557.) 

(D)  CAR-MILE  REVENUE,  EXPENSE,  ETC. 

The  car-mile  revenues,  expenses,  etc.,  entered  for  items 
Nos.  22  to  28,  inclusive,  on  Form  No.  70,  are  secured  by 
dividing  the  income  account  item  (items  Nos.  7  to  20)  for 
each  class  of  service  by  the  car-miles  for  that  class  found 
at  item  3  for  columns  3  and  4,  and  at  item  2  for  columns  6, 
8,  10,  and  12.     (R.  557,  558.) 

(E)  CAR-FOOT  MILE  REVENUE,  EXPENSE,  ETC. 

The  car-foot  mile  revenues,  expenses,  etc.,  entered  for 
items  Nos.  29  to  35,  inclusive,  are  secured  by  dividing  the 
income  account  item  (items  Nos.  7  to  20)  for  each  class  of 
service  by  the  car-foot  miles  for  that  class  found  at  item 
No.  5.     (R.  558.) 

(F)  INVESTMENT  IN  PROPERTY. 

The  investment  in  road  property  (item  No.  37)  was  se- 
curedfrom  Form  General  No.  4,  furnished  by  the  several  car- 
riers, and  verified  by  reference  to  the  annual  report  of  each 
carrier  filed  with  the  commission  for  December  31,  1916. 
In  case  no  general  form  was  rendered  the  investment  re- 
ported to  the  commission  was  used.  Where  leased  Imes 
were  involved,  it  was  endeavored  to  secure  the  total  invest- 
ment producing  revenues  reported  on  Form  R.  M.  P.  No.  50. 
Depreciation,  if  any,  was  deducted  from  the  road  invest- 
ment. Many  of  the  carriers  were  not  able  to  separate  road 
from  equipment  investment,  and  therefore  the  totals  given 
for  items  Nos.  39-a,  40,  and  42  will  contain  amounts  not 
found  in  items  37,  38,  and  39,  but  these  have  been  entered 
in  each  case  at  the  foot  of  the  form  with  appropriate  nota- 
tion.    (R.  558.) 

It  was  shown  that  not  all  the  carriers  transporting  the 
mails  had  rendered  reports  on  the  forms  prepared  and  that 


433 

these  were  not  included  in  the  recapitulation  of  property 
investment.     (R.  558,  559.) 
The  witness  further  testified: 

The  Witness.  There  were  some  of  the  carriers  which  did 
not  separate  the  investment  in  miscellaneous  physical 
property  from  the  transportation  property,  I.  C.  C.  Ac- 
count No.  701,  investment  in  road  and  equipment,  and 
therefore  the  property  investment  shown  on  Form  No.  70 
is  increased  by  those  amounts.  It  was  impossible  to  make 
that  separation.  The  road  property  investment  was  sepa- 
rated between  freight  and  passenger  service  by  the  use  of 
ratios  for  the  operating  expenses.  A  further  separation  of 
the  passenger  road  property  was  secured  by  use  of  the 
ratios  for  the  classes  of  operating  expenses  as  divided  to 
each  class,  for  item  12,  columns  9,  11,  and  13.  The  invest- 
ment in  equipment,  items  Nos.  38,  39,  and  39-b,  was- 
reported  by  the  carriers  upon  Form  R.  M.  P.  No.  57. 
That  form  is  shown  in  department  Exhibit  No.  27,  and 
after  allocation  and  apportionment  to  the  several  classes 
of  service  the  results  were  entered  upon  Form  R.  M.  P. 
No.  70.  The  method  of  allocation  and  apportionment 
used  for  separating  each  item  of  equipment  valuation  is  as 
follows : 

Form  R.  M.  P.  No.  57,  I.  C.  C.  Account  No.  51— Steam 
locomotives ■ 

Question  (By  Mr.  Stewart).  Now,  Mr.  Prentiss,  right 
there  you  are  referring  back  to  the  reports  upon  Form 
No.  57? 

Answer.  Yes,  sir. 

Question.  Which  were  designed  to  bring  out  all  these 
several  items  of  equipment  in  such  a  manner  as  to  enable 
their  allocation  and  apportionment? 

Answer.  Yes,  sir. 

Question.  For  the  purposes  of  this  statement,  Form 
No.  70? 

Answer.  On  Form  No.  70.     (R.  562,  563.) 

SEPARATION  BETWEEN  FREIGHT  AND  PASSENGER 
SERVICES  AND  BETWEEN  PASSENGER,  EXPRESS, 
AND  MAIL  SERVICES  OF  THE  VALUE  OF  RAIL- 
ROAD   EQUIPMENT. 

The  Witness.  For  the  information  of  the  examiner,  I 
will  take  up  the  allocation  and  a])portionmcnt  of  P^orm 
R.  M.  P.  No.  57,  which  provides  for  the  separation  between 
the  freight  and  passenger  services  and  the  passenger,  ex- 
press, and  mail  services  of  the  value  of  the  railroad  equip- 
ment for  each  carrier. 

122698—19 28 


434 

Mr.  Stewart.  As  reported  by  the  carriers  ? 

The  Witness.  As  reported  by  the  carriers  on  this  form. 
The  value  of  the  freight  train  cars  was  allocated  directly 
to  the  freight  service.  The  value  of  the  freight  locomotives 
was  allocated  directly  to  the  freight  service.  The  passenger- 
locomotive  value  was  allocated  directly  to  the  passenger 
service,  and  then  separated  between  passenger,  express,  and 
mail  by  use  of  the  car-foot  (mile)  ratios  found  on  Form 
70,  at  item  No.  4,  columns  9,  11,  and  13. 

Yard  or  shifting  locomotives  are  allocated,  or  appor- 
tioned, as  the  case  may  be,  in  ratio,  for  freight  and  passen- 
ger, with  the  locomotive  switching  miles  reported  bv  each 
carrier  on  Form  R.  M.  P.  No.  53,  I.  C.  C.  Accounts  Nos.  38 
and  39.  The  further  separation  between  passenger,  ex- 
press, and  mail  was  made  in  like  manner  as  for  passenger- 
train  locomotives  by  the  use  of  car-foot  mile  ratios;  the 
total  value  for  steam  locomotives  was  apportioned  between 
freight  and  passenger  services  by  use  of  ratios  for  the  total 
locomotive  mileage  reported  on  Form  R.  M.  P.  No.  53,  as 
described  in  Letter  of  Instruction  No.  504. 

Account  No.  52 — Other  locomotives: 

These  are  mostly  electric  in  character.  This  value  was 
allocated  to  passenger  service,  unless  the  primary  accounts 
Nos.  311,  312,  and  313,  w^hich  covered  repairs,  depreciation, 
and  retirements  of  this  class  of  locomotives,  indicated  that 
the  freight  service  was  served  by  such  locomotives,  in 
which  case  the  ratios  for  the  total  separations  to  freight 
and  passenger  of  these  accounts,  as  reported  by  the 
carrier  on  Form  51,  were  used  as  the  basis  of  separation 
between  passenger  and  freight  services. 

A  further  separation  between  passenger,  express,  and 
mail  was  made  by  means  of  the  car-foot  mile  ratios,  as 
explained  under  steam  locomotives. 

The  whole  item  of  passenger-train  cars,  of  course,  is 
allocated  directly  to  the  passenger  service  as  a  whole,  but 
under  this  general  head,  Account  No.  54,  there  are  distinct 
allocations  to  the  several  classes  of  service,  passenger, 
express,  and  mail. 

First.  The  coaches  were  allocated  directly  to  the 
passenger  service.  The  coaches  include  parlor,  sleeper, 
dining,  observation,  and  all  other  cars  used  for  passenger 
service  exclusively. 

Second.  The  express  cars  used  exclusively  in  the  express 
service,  refrigerator-express  cars,  and  all  others  used  ex- 
clusively by  the  express  service  were  directly  allocated  to 
the  express. 

Tiiird.  The  railway  post-ofhce  cars  were  allocated  di- 
rectlv  to  the  mail  service. 


435 

Fourth.  The  mail-storage  cars  were  allocated  directly 
to  the  mail  service. 

I  would  like  to  state  that  there  were  quite  a  number  of 
roads  that  were  able  to  separate  the  mail-storage  car  values 
from  the  total  baggage  cars,  and  also  to  separate  the 
exclusive-baggage  car  values.  There  was  no  statement 
made  by  any  of  the  companies  as  to  the  accuracy  of  this 
division.     It  was  taken  as  reported  by  the  companies. 

Fifth.  Baggage  cars,  (a)  For  baggage  exclusively,  the 
total  amount  was  directly  allocated  to  passenger  service 
exclusively.  (6)  For  mixed  loads,  the  total  amount  was 
apportioned  to  passenger,  express,  and  mail  services  by  use 
of  the  ratios  for  car-foot  miles  reported  for  cars  carrying 
mixed  loads  only. 

Sixth.  Combination  passenger  train  cars.  The  total 
amount  was  apportioned  to  passenger,  express,  and  mail 
services  by  use  of  the  ratios  for  car-foot  miles  reported  for 
cars  carrying  mixed  loads  only. 

Nos.  5  and  6  covered  all  baggage  cars  and  combination 
cars,  and  in  ease  these  values  were  not  separated,  then  the 
total  amount  for  all  the  baggage  and  combination  cars  was 
separated  by  use  of  the  space  in  the  mixed  cars. 

Seventh.  All  other  passenger  tram  cars,  including  such  as 
milk  cars,  etc.  The  value  was  directly  allocated  to  passen- 
ger service  exclusivel3^ 

Account  No.  55 — Motor  equipment  of  cars.  This  total 
value  was  considered  as  exclusively  a  passenger  charge, 
unless  the  primaiy  accounts,  Nos.  320,  321,  and  322,  indi- 
cated freight  operation  of  motor  equipment,  when  the 
ratios  for  freight  and  passenger  for  these  accounts  were 
used  to  separate  between  the  two  classes.  The  apportion- 
ment to  passenger,  express,  and  mail  was  made  by  use  of 
the  car-foot  mile  ratios. 

Account  No.  56— Floating  equipment: 

First.  Water-line  transportation.  The  allocation  or  ap- 
portionment of  the  boats  in  water-line  transportation  fol- 
lowed the  allocations  or  apportionments  for  the  water  trans 
portation  primary  accounts  reported  on  Form  R.  M.  P.  No. 
51-D,  Nos.  431,  432,  and  433,  for  each  carrier.  This  total 
amount,  in  the  case  of  most  carriers,  was  considered  as  not 
related,  and  the  entry  will  be  found  in  column  14  on  Form 
R.  M.  P.  No.  70, 

Second.  Ferry  or  water-transfer  service.  The  value  was 
allocated  or  apportioned  in  accordance  with  the  allocations 
or  apportionments  for  the  primary  accounts  Nos.  323,  324, 
325,  and  40S,  Forms  R.  M.  P.  Nos.  51-B  and  -D,  and  also 
Nos.  54-B  and  -D.  Car-foot  mile  ratios  were  used  to  sepa- 
rate the  total  nassenger  charge  between  the  passenger,  ex- 
press, and  mail  services. 


436 

In  case  the  company  reporting  did  not  have  water  line 
and  ferry  service  vahies  separately,  the  separations  followed 
the  primary  accomits  as  to  allocation  and  apportionment, 
all  the  accounts  involved  ])eing  considered  as  a  whole,  and 
the  ratios  ohtained  between  each  class  of  service  and  the 
aggregate  of  all  classes. 

Accoiuit  No.  57 — Work  equipment.  This  value  was  sep- 
arated between  freight  and  passenger  services  by  use  of  the 
ratios  for  all  divided  amounts  for  accounts  326,  327,  and 
328,  taken  together.  The  separation  of  the  passenger 
charge  was  made  by  use  of  the  car-foot  mile  ratios. 

Account  No.  58— Miscellaneous  equipment.  The  total 
amount  was  separated  between  freight  and  passenger  in 
the  same  manner  as  for  work  equipment,  except  that  the 
ratio  between  passenger  and  freight  was  secured  from 
Account  No.  301  (superintendence,  mamtenance  of  equip- 
ment). In  compiling  data  from  Form  No.  57,  separate 
tabulations  were  made  for  each  company  by  both  plans 
1  and  2. 

Eighth.  The  investment  in  miscellaneous  physical  prop- 
erty (item  No.  41,  Form  No.  70)  was  considered  as  not  re- 
lated to  the  inquiry,  and  the  total  investment  therein  was 
entered  in  column  No.  14. 

Ninth.  The  passenger  service  train  revenue,  exclusive  of 
mail  and  express  revenues  (item  No.  44,  Form  70),  was 
secured  by  deducting  the  mail  and  express  revenue  amounts 
from  the  aggregate  of  primary  Accounts  Nos.  102  to  109, 
inclusive,  as  reported  on  Forms  R.  M.  P.  Nos.  50  and  53. 

The  passenger  service  car  miles  reported  on  Form 
R.  M.  P.  No.  301  and  at  item  2,  column  8,  on  Form  No.  70. 
were  used  as  the  divisor  to  secure  the  result  shown  for 
item  No.  45,  the  passenger  service  train  revenue  per  car 
mile.     (R.  564-569.) 

BETTJRN  ON  REPORTED  VALUE  OF  PROPERTY  BASED 
ON  REPORTED  AND  ACTUAL  EXPRESS  AND  MAIL 
REVENUES. 

Mr.  Prentiss  testified  on  cross-examination  to  the  effect 
that  the  express  and  mail  revenues  shown  on  recapitulation 
of  Form  70  are  those  reported  by  the  railroads  to  the  Post 
Office  Department  and  the  Interstate  Commerce  Commis- 
sion, and  were  necessarily  used  for  comparative  purposes; 
that  the  express  and  mail  revenues  shown  on  recapitula- 
tion of  Form  71  are  those  reported  by  Mr.  Newlean,  vice 
president  of  the  American  Railway  Express,  for  express, 
and  those  reported  by  the  Post  Office  Department  for  mail 


437 

and  represent  actual  receipts,  (R.  586-595.)  With  re- 
spect to  the  revennes  shown  on  Exhibits  66  and  67,  Mr. 
Stewart  stated  as  follows: 

Mr.  Stewart.  May  I  suggest  to  counsel  for  the  railroads 
that  there  can  be  no  possible  ground  for  difference  lietween 
us  on  these  items.  One  represents  the  amount  submitted 
by  the  railroad  companies  in  their  reports  and  used  for 
statistical  purposes,  and  the  other  represents  the  amounts 
which  were  secured  by  mutual  agreement  between  the 
railroad  companies  and  the  department  and  used  for  these 
other  purposes.  The  deductions  that  he  desires  drawn 
with  reference  to  net  income  returned  on  estimated  value 
of  the  property  on  these  secured  amounts  of  revenue,  shown 
on  Form  71,  are  shown  on  these  two  exhibits  which  I  have 
asked  permission  to  submit,  and  which  are  now  with  the 
printer.     (R.  595,  596.) 

It  further  appears  by  the  evidence  that  the  car-foot  miles 
used  in  the  preparation  ot  Post  Office  Department  Exhibits 
66  and  67  under  plans  1  and  2  were  those  provided  by  the 
methods  of  assignment  of  unauthorized  and  unused  space 
in  accordance  with  Post  Office  Department  Exhibit  65. 
(R.  606-609.) 

THE  RESULTS  OF  POST  OFFICE  DEPARTMENT  EXHIBITS 
66  AND  67  FAIRLY  REPRESENT  COST  ESTIMATED 
ON  THE  BASES  EMPLOYED. 

Question  (by  Attorney  Examiner  Brown).  You  say 
you  are  the  statistician  of  the  Post  Office  Department? 

Answer.  No,  sir.  I  am  the  accountant  in  the  Special 
Assistant  to  the  Attorney  General's  office  at  present.  At 
one  time  I  was  statistician  for  the  Second  Assistant's 
office. 

Question.  Well,  you  are  familiar  with  this  situation, 
anyhow  ? 

Answer.  Yes. 

Question.  Eliminating  all  criticisms  that  can  be  made 
of  individual  items  or  the  methods  of  allocations  here 
and  there,  do  the  results  that  appear  on  these  exhibits 
here,  Nos.  66  and  67,  fairly  represent  to  your  mind  the 
cost  of  the  mail  service  ? 

Answer.  As  an  item  of  operating  expense  or  as  an  item 
of  jiet  return  ? 

Question.  No;  I  am  talking  about  the  cost  of  the  service. 

Answer.  The  cost  of  the  service  for  the  operation? 


438 

Question.  Yes. 

Answer.  Well,  I  should  say  that  it  represented  the  full 
cost  of  the  service — the  full  cost  of  the  mail  service. 

Question.  Well,  you  mean  by  that  that  it  fairly  repre- 
sents it  ? 

Answer.  It  fairly  represents  the  full  cost.  Plan  No.  2 
fairly  represents  the  full  cost  of  the  mail  service. 

Question  (by  Mr.  Wood).  Well,  the  plan  has  nothing 
to  do  with  the  cost,  has  it  ? 

Answer.  Yes.  The  cost  of  the  mail  service  is  deter- 
mined by  plan  1  or  plan  2.  You  can  not  get  the  mail 
service  without  the  two  plans. 

Question  (by  Attorney  Examiner  Brown)  .  Well,  in  the 
net  result,  there  is  not  a  great  deal  of  difference  between 
the  two,  is  there? 

Answer.  A  difference  of  $3,372,000  for  plan  1  and 
$3,529,000  for  plan  2. 

Question  (by  Mr.  Wood).  Where  do  you  show  the  cost; 
on  what  line  is  that  ? 

Answer.  Operating  expenses,*  item  11,  total  railway 
operating  expenses.  The  mail  is  in  column  12  for  both 
plans. 

Question  (by  Mr.  Stewart).  That  is,  for  the  month  of 
April? 

Answer.  For  the  month  of  April;  yes. 

Question  (by  Attorney  Examiner  Brown).  I  do  not 
quite  get  your  figures.  Where  you  say  total  raihvay 
operating  expenses,  we  have  for  the  mail  $3,331,433.91 
under  plan  No.  1,  on  class  1  carriers,  and  $3,353,000 

Answ^er.  No;  $3,484,000  for  plan  2  for  class  1  carriers. 

Question.  $3,484,000.  The  difference  there  is  some- 
thing over  a  hundred  thousand,  just  glancing  over  it,  is 
it  not? 

Answer.  Yes;  that  is  about  the  difference — about 
$150,000  difference. 

Question.  Now,  you  say  operating  expenses,  total  rail- 
way-operating expenses,  and  what  you  mean  by  that,  or 
what  you  w^ant  the  commission  to  understand,  is  that  that 
is  w^hat  it  cost  the  carriers  to  render  the  mail  service 
according  to  these  figures  ? 

Answer.  For  the  operating  expenses  paid  by  the  car- 
riers for  their  operations,  their  transportation  operations. 

Question  (by  Dr.  Lorenz).  That  does  not  include 
taxes  or  investment  ? 

Answer.  That  does  not  include  taxes  or  overhead.   • 

Question  (by  Attorney  Examiner  Brown).  Not  in- 
cluding taxes? 

Answer.  Not  including  taxes  or  joint  facility  rents. 


439 

Mr.  Stewart.  That,  of  course,  is  on  the  basis,  as  we  all 
understand,  of  these  apportionments  under  these  various 
methods. 

Attorney  Examiner  Brown.  Oh,  yes. 

Mr.  Stewart.  Added  to  the  allocations.     (R.  560-562.) 

RECAPITULATION   OF  FORM   71    (FIRST   PART   OF  EACH 
POST  OFFICE  DEPARTMENT  EXHIBITS  66  AND  67). 

Form  R.  M.  P.  No.  71:  The  information  on  this  form 
was  secured  from  Form  R.  M.  P.  No.  70,  with  the  excep- 
tion of  the  express  revenue  and  the  mail  revenue,  items 
4  and  7,  in  column  6. 

The  car-miles  (column  3)  are  six-sevenths  of  the  total 
car-miles  reported  for  the  period  March  27  to  April  30, 
1917,  transcribed  from  Form  R.  M.  P.  No.  70  for  item 
No.  2. 

The  car-foot  miles  (column  4)  are  six-sevenths  of  the  car- 
foot  miles  reported  for  the  period  March  27  to  April  30, 
1917,  transcribed  from  Form  R.  M.  P.  No.  70  for  item  No.  5. 

Question  (by  Mr.  Stewart).  Now,  Mr.  Prentiss,  you 
are  speaking  with  particular  reference  to  the  recapitula- 
tion shown  as  Post  Office  Department  Exhibit  No.  66, 
are  you  not  ? 

Answer.  Sixty-six;  yes.  Well,  it  includes  both  66  and 
67.  Form  71  for  both  exhibits  was  obtained  in  the  same 
manner. 

The  percentages  to  the  total  mail  car-foot  miles  shown 
in  column  2  for  item  No.  6,,  (a)  to  {d)  refer  to  the  car-foot 
miles  found  in  column  4.  The  percentages  shown  in 
column  5  for  plans  1  and  2  are  the  same  as  for  item  No.  5, 
Form    No.    70. 

The  entries  in  columns  9  and  12  are  all  secured  from 
Form  R.  M.  P.  No.  70  in  columns  6,  8,  10,  and  12  for 
items  11,  13,  14,  and  18,  as  indicated  at  the  top  of  columns 
on  Form  No.  71. 

The  entries  in  column  15  are  the  balances  secured  by 
subtracting  the  sum  of  entries  in  columns  9  and  12  from 
the  entries' in  column  6.     (R.  569,  570.) 

ASCERTAINMENT  COVERS  COST  OF  INITIAL  AND  TERMI- 
NAL SERVICE. 

Question  (1)}'  Mr.  Stewart).  Mr.  Prentiss,  we  \vA\e  no 
statistics  to  present  to  the  commission  with  res])ect  to  the 
separate  cost  of  what  is  generally  referred  to  as  the  ter- 
minal service,  whicli  is  covered  in  the  statute  fixing  the 
rates  for  what  is  known  as  the  initial  and  terminal  charge. 
What  efforts  were  made,  if  any,  to  secure  data  u])()u  that 
form  ? 


440 

Answer.  When  the  department  was  desirous  of  taking 
up  the  matter  of  the  financial  statistics,  the  railroads  were 
requested  to  furnish  information  in  roo;ard  to  station  facili- 
ties and  switching  facilities  furnished  for  the  several 
classes  of  servict^s,  including  the  mail  ser\'ice.  m^on  which 
it  was  intended  to  secure  this  information.  The  matter 
was,  for  a  time,  left  in  aheyance,  and  finally  the  companies 
stated  that  it  would  he  "impossible  for  them  to  furnish 
this  mformation. 

Question.  Now,  the  expense  covered  hi  that  service, 
however,  is  included  in  these  statistics  as  a  whole  which 
we  have  submitted  ? 

Answer.  Yes,  sir. 

Question.  So  that  while  it  was  thought  to  be  impractical 
to  secure  the  data  upon  which  a  findnig  could  be  made 
separately  with  reference  to  those  expenses,  they  are  never- 
theless covered  in  these  figures  ? 

Answer.  Yes,sir. 

Mr.  Stewart.  Mr.  Examiner,  the  only  purpose  of  these 
questions  is  to  let  the  record  show  that  an  effort  was  made 
to  get  this,  but  it  was  thought  to  lie  impracticable.  (R. 
570,  571.) 

COMPARISON  OF  NET  INCOME  WITH  PROPERTY  INVESTMENT 
AS  SHOWN  ON  POST  OFFICE  DEPARTMENT  EXHIBITS  NOS. 
67  AND  66,  UNIT   REVENUE   AND    COST    FIGURES.     (POST 
OFFICE  DEPARTMENT  EXHIBIT  NO.  74.) 
AS  TO  POST  OFFICE  DEPARTMENT  EXHIBIT  67. 

Mr.  Prentiss  testified  on  direct  examination  as  follows: 
Answer.  Exhibit  No.  74  is  to  show,  in  comparison,  the 
statistics  for  mileage  and  income  account,  with  the  prop- 
erty investment,  as  shown  on  Exhibit  67  of  the  Post  Office 
Department,  Forms  Nos.  70  and  71. 

Question  (bv  Attornev  Examiner  Brown).  As  I  recol- 
lect that,  Exhibit  No.  67  was  a  statement  of  the  investment 
of  the  carriers,  as  shown  by  the  reports  to  the  Interstate 
Commerce  Commission. 

Answer.  That  is  a  recajiitulation  of  Forms  70  and  71  for 
the  class  1  carriers. 

The  reason  for  Exhibit  74  is  to  show  the  comparison  of 
the  property  investment. 

On  Form"  71,  Exhibit  67,  the  property  is  not  shown,  and 
in  order  to  draw  a  relationship  between  the  revenue,  ex- 
penses, and  net  income,  as  shown  on  Form  71,  with  the 
property,  as  shown  on  Form  70,  Exhibit  67,  it  is  necessary 
to  set  out  the  figures  in  the  manner  shown  in  Exhibit  No. 
74.      (R.  2940,  2941.) 


441 

The  exhibit  exphiins  itself.  The  car-miles  are  six 
sevenths  of  the  total  for  the  period  from  March  27  to 
April  30,  1917,  and  the  car-foot  miles  are  the  same.  They 
have  already  beqn  reported  on  Exhibit  67. 

(A)  REVENUES. 

The  revenues  given  in  item  No.  7  differ  as  to  express 
and  mail.  The  S56, 185,000  passenger  revenue,  including 
baggage  and  miscellaneous,  is  the  same  as  that  reported 
on'^Form  No.  70,  Exhibit  No.  67.  That  is  the  passenger 
service  train  revenue.  This  differs  from  the  revenue 
reported  on  Form  70,  Exhibit  67,  in  that  it  excludes  the 
revenue  for  parcel  room  receipts,  etc.,  which  are  incidental 
to  the  service. 

The  express  revenue,  S8, 125,000,  is  the  express  revenue 
reported  by  the  express  companies  as  paid  to  the  raih'oad 
companies' for  the  month  of  April,  1917,  and  the  mail 
revenue  is  that  vdiich  was  shown  by  the  records  of  the 
Post  Office  Department  as  actually  paid  the  raikoads  for 
the  month  of  April,  1917.  The  remaining  figures  for  the 
mcome  account,  items  8  to  19,  would  be  the  same  except- 
ing in  the  cases  where  the  net  total  operating  income  is 
drawn,  and,  of  course,  the  net  income  differs  because  of 
the  fact  that  the  revenues  have  been  changed.  The  dif- 
ferences are  sUght.     (R.  2941,  2942.) 

(B)  NET  REVENUES. 

Refer  to  plan  2,  in  the  last  three  columns,  8,  10,  and  12, 
and  it  will  be  found  that  the  net  revenue  from  railway 
operations,  shown  as  S13,961,000  for  passenger,  $1,539,000 
for  express,  and  $845,000  for  mail,  are  changed  from  those 
reported  on  Exhibit  67,  which  were  $16,861,000  for  pas- 
senger, $1,232,000  for  express,  and  $1,068,000  for  mail— a 
difference  there  of  about  $200,000  in  the  mail,  about 
$300,000  in  the  express,  and  $3,000,000  in  the  passenger. 

The  net  income,  shown  in  item  20,  is  found  on  Exhibit 
74,  plan  2,  the  last  three  columns,  8,  10,  and  12. 

Question.  Now,  what  do  you  mean  by  "plan  2"?  You 
do  not  have  it  marked  on  this  exhibit. 

Answer.  Plan  2  is  not  shown,  because  this  is  an  exhibit 
taken  from  Exhibit  No.  67,  where  the  plans  are  set  forth. 

Question.  And  that  means 

Answer.  The  same  columns  are  used. 

Question.  And  the  results  of  that  are  found  in  columns 
8,  10,  and  12? 

Answer.  Eight,  ten,  and  twelve;  yes. 

Question.  iUl  right;  proceed. 


442 

Answer.  The  net  income  from  passenger  is  shown  as 
$10,956,000,  that  for  express  as  Sl,084,000,  and  for  mail  as 
$597,000. 

***** 

The  amounts  previously  shown  in  Exhibit  No.  67  were 
passenger,  $13,856,000;  express,  $777,000;  and  mail, 
$820,000. 

Question.  So  that  in  this  exhibit  the  actual  revenues 
received  from  express  are  show^n  to  be  much  larger  than 
on  the  former  exhibit,  and  there  is  some  diminution  in  the 
amount  stated  for  the  mail  ? 

Answer.  For  the  mail;  yes,  sir.     (R.  2942,  2943.) 

(C)  PER  CENT  OF  NET  INCOME  TO  OPERATING  REVENUES 
The  difference  in  revenues  brings  the  mail  and  express 

into  very  close  relationship  as  to  the  net  return. 

This  is  shown  in  item  21,  per  cent  of  net  income  to  oper- 
ating revenues,  where  the  passenger  is  given  as  19.50,  the 
express  as  13.34,  and  the  mail  as  13.80  per  cent. 

Question.  Now,  in  each  case,  that  is  the  per  cent  of  net 
income  to  the  operating  revenues  ? 

Answer.  The  operating  revenues,  yes;  the  passenger 
service  train  revenue,  the  actual  express  revenue,  and  the 
actual  mail  revenue  for  the  month  of  April. 

Question.  So  that  for  the  mail  there  w^as  a  return  of 
13.80  per  cent  net  income  to  the  operating  revenues  ? 

Answer.  That  is  right.     (R.  2943.) 

(D)  INCOME  PER  CAR-MILE  AND  PER  CAR-FOOT  MILE. 
The  items  following  below  show  the  rates  per  car-mile 

and  per  car -foot  mile. 

The  revenues  for  passenger,  express,  and  mail  are,  re- 
spectively, 28.97  cents,  20.99  cents,  and  22.35  cents.  (R. 
2943,  2944.) 

(E)  OPERATING  EXPENSES  PER  CAR-MILE. 

Tlie  operating  expenses  per  car-mile  were  21.77  cents  for 
passenger,  17.02  cents  for  express,  and  17.99  cents  for  mail. 
(R.  2944.) 

(F)  NET  INCOME  PER  CAR-MILE. 

Per  car-mile  the  net  mcome  for  passenger,  express,  and 
mail  was  as  foUows:  Passenger,  5.65  cents;  express,  2.80 
cents;   and  mail,  3.08  cents.     (R.  2944.) 

(G)  PROPERTY  INVESTMENT. 

On  this  exhibit  (74)  the  property  investment  is  not  sep- 
arated between  road  and  equipment,  but  the  total  only  is 
shown,  item  40,  as  it  is  taken  from  Exhibit  No.  67,  and  I 


443 

will  read  the  amounts  in  colunms  8,  10,  and  12,  which  are 
the  same  as  plan  2  on  Exhibit  67. 

The  passenger  road  and  equipment  investment  was 
S2,955,000,000;  the  express,  $425,000,000;  and  the  mail, 
$237,000,000.     I  have  not  read  the  thousands. 

Question.  Mr.  Prentiss,  those  are  mainly  arrived  at  by 
apportionments,  as  you  have  previously  described;  in  fact, 
these  are  taken  from  your  former  exhibits  ? 

Answer.  The  part  which  relates  to  the  road  investment 
is  wholly  an  apportionment  based  upon  the  separation  of 
operatmg  costs.  The  equipment  mvestment,  however,  is 
an  actual  amount,  m  part.  For  the  mail  service  there  was 
an  actual  allocation  of  S8, 254,000  and  an  apportionment  of 
$22,566,000. 

Question.  All  these  values  to  which  you  refer  are  the 
values  which  were  given  by  the  railroads  themselves,  with- 
out any  possibiUty  of  check  ? 

Answer.  These  were  the  amounts  reported  by  the  rail- 
road companies  on  the  form  prepared  for  reports  of  invest- 
ment in  road  and  equipment. 

Question  (by  Attorney  Exammer  Brown).  That  in- 
cluded your  mail  apartment  cars,  your  railway  post-office 
cars,  and  then,  so  far  as  baggage  care  are  concerned,  it  was 
allocated,  was  it,  on  a  percentage  ? 

Answer.  It  was  apportioned  on  the  percentage.  The 
percentage  in  the  mixed  cars  was  used  as  the  basis  of  appor- 
tionment. 

Question.  Now,  take  the  portion  of  a  station  that  is  de- 
voted to  the  mail.     Was  that  also  apportioned  ? 

Answer.  That  was  apportioned.  That  was  included  in 
the  road  investment,  of  course,  and  was  apportioned  on  the 
basis  of  the  costs. 

Question.  And  I  suppose  it  was  the  same  way  with  your 
trucks  and  motor  cars,  and  all  that  kmd  of  thing  ? 

Answer.  They  went  in  as  miscellaneous  equipment. 

Question.  Of  couree,  they  would  be  mterchangeably 
used  to  move  the  baggage  up  to  the  car  door,  and  the  ex- 
press, as  well  as  the  mail? 

Answer.  That  was  apportioned  on  the  basis  of  the  car- 
foot  mile  percentage.  The  car-foot  mile  was  used  as  the 
basis  of  the  division  of  the  value  of  the  locomotives  and  for 
the  value  of  the  working  equipment  and  the  miscellaneous 
equipment.     (R.  2944-2946.) 

FORM  R.  M.  P.  NO.  57.— PASSENGER,  EXPRESS,  AND  MAIL 
EQUIPMENT. 

Question  (by  Mr.  Stewart).  Mr.  Prentiss,  the  Post  Office 
Department  had  a  form  known  as  Form  57.  Will  you 
briefly  describe  the  purpose  of  that? 


444 

Answer.  Form  57  was  prepared  with  the  idea  of  securing 
the  actual  allocated  or  directly  allocated  cost  of  passenger, 
express,  and  mail  service  equipment,  primarily,  and, 
secondarily,  to  make  a  comparison  between  the  three 
classes  of  service  as  to  the  value  of  the  property  used  in 
those  three  classes  of  service. 

Question  (by  Attorney  Examiner  Brown).  Take  your 
cranes,  your  mail  chutes,  and  all  of  that.  That  is  directly 
allocated  to  the  mails  ? 

Answer.  No;   that  would  not  be  mcluded  m  this. 

Question.  It  would  not  be  ? 

Answer.  No ;  because  the  direct  allocations  that  we  have 
been  able  to  make  in  this  case  were  those  of  the  actual 
cars — ^the  passenger  train  cars,  the  express  cars,  and  the 
mail  railway  post-office  cars,  the  mail  storage  cars,  and  the 
passenger  cars  used  exclusively  for  the  miscellaneous  serv- 
ice, such  as  milk,  etc.  They  were  the  only  ones  we  were  able 
to  check  absolutely,  outside  of  the  freight  service,  of  course. 

Question  (by  Mr.  Stewart).  Did  the  companies  gener- 
ally respond  to  the  purj^oses  of  that  form  ? 

Answer.  Quite  generally,  yes.  There  were  a  number  of 
companies  that,  from  the  nature  of  their  accounts,  were  not 
able  to  give  the  full  values  for  each  class  of  equipment, 
but,  as  a  rule,  they  responded  to  the  form,  and  gave  the 
best  answer  they  were  aiile  to  from  their  records. 

Question.  What  was  the  effect  of  securing  that  informa- 
tion upon  the  question  of  the  apportionment  or  assignment 
of  value  to  the  several  classes  of  service,  particularly  to  the 
mails?  What  I  have  reference  to  is  how  did  it  affect  the 
question  as  compared  with  some  other  kind  of  division, 
where  you  would  not  have  had  that  direct  allocation  ? 

Answer.  The  results,  as  shown  by  Exhibit  67,  indicate 
that  the  equipment  which  could  be  directly  allocated  to 
the  mail  service  was  considerably  less  in  amount,  propor- 
tionate to  the  whole,  than  the  value  of  the  equipment  that 
was  apportioned.  The  per  cent  to  mail  of  the  allocated 
equipment  was  4.81  per  cent,  while  the  per  cent  to  mail -for 
the  apportioned  part  of  the  equipment  was  8.44  per  cent, 
and  the  car-foot  mileage  was  7.28. 

The  cost  percentage  on  Exhibit  67  for  the  mail  service 
was  6.66,  and  the  road  value,  as  a  total,  for  mail  service 
shows  6.62.  The  total  for  both  road  and  equipment  was 
6.57  per  cent.  So  that  it  indicates  that  4.81  per  cent  of 
value  allocated  to  mail  service  is  much  lower  than  the  pro- 
portion which  was  taken  by  car-foot  mile  apportionment. 
(K.  2946-2948.) 


445 

Question.  Did  the  railroad  companies  avail  themselves 
of  the  information  returned  on  Form  57  in  making  their 
apportionment  to  the  mails? 

***** 

Question  (by  Mr.  Stewart).  What  I  had  reference  to 
particularly,  Mr.  Prentiss,  was  this  question,  whether  the 
railroads,  in  presenting  their  estimate  of  the  value  of  the 
property  assignable  to  the  mails,  arrived  at  that  estimate 
by  using  these  allocations,  which  were  made  from  Form  57, 
on  your  report  directly  to  the  mails,  or  did  they  use  some 
other  manner  of  reaching  the  value  of  the  equipment  which 
shall  be  so  assigned  ? 

Answer.  It  is  my  understanding  that  the  reports  on  Form 
57,  and  I  think  Mr.  Wettling  so  stated,  were  not  used  by 
him  in  his  tabulation  of  the  value  of  properties.  (R.  2949, 
2950.) 

OTHER  DIRECT  ALLOCATIONS  OF  VALUE  OF  EQUIPMENT 
WOULD  HAVE  REDUCED  PASSENGER  AND  THERE- 
FORE MAIL  ESTIMATED  COST  AND  PROPERTY  VALUE. 

Question.  Do  you  think  it  a  fair  conclusion  to  draw  that 
if  the  department  could  have  secured  a  further  direct  allo- 
cation of  values  with  respect  to  other  classes  of  property 
that  the  amount  proportioned  to  the  mails  would  have 
been  correspondingly  less,  or  somewhat  less,  than  based 
upon  a  car-ioot  mile  ratio  ? 

Answer.  It  is  my  opinion  that  the  division  of  operatuig 
expenses  between  passenger  and  freight  services,  and  also 
between  passenger,  express,  and  mail  services,  if  the  com- 
panies could  have  shown  the  facts  in  regard  to  those  ex- 
penses, the  passenger  would  have  been  considerably  lower^ 
and  the  proportion,  both  for  express  and  mail,  would  have 
been  considerably  lower,  for  these  reasons:  In  the  first 
place,  there  are  numbers  of  operating  expense  accounts 
which  have  practically  no  relation  to  the  express  and  mail 
service.  The  use  of  the  car-foot  mile  as  the  basis  might  be 
considered  representative  of  the  train,  and  the  expenses  in 
connection  with  the  train,  but  to  apply  such  a  basis  to  ex- 
penses which  are  covered  in  the  maintenance  of  way  and 
structure  and  equipment  accounts,  as  overhead,  so  to 
speak,  stationery,  and  printing,  and  items  of  that  nature — 
I  do  not  think  the  express  and  mail  service  should  be  made 
to  bear  the  per  cent  that  is  used  in  our  calculations. 
(R.  2948,  2949.) 


446 

(H)  PER  CENT  OF  NET  INCOME  TO  PROPERTY  VALUE. 

Answer.  Item  4.3  (Exhi])it  74)  giA'cs  for  the  passenger, 
express,  and  mail  service  the  per  cent  of  net  income  to  the 
property,  and  this  is  found  to  be,  for  passenger,  0.37  of  1 
per  cent,  0.25  of  1  per  cent  for  the  express,  and  0,25  of  1 
per  cent  for  the  mail.     This  is  for  the  class  1  carriers. 

Question.  That  is  for  the  month 

Answer.  For  the  month  of  April,  yes.  A  comparison  for 
the  yearly  return  could  be  made  by  multiplying  these 
accounts  %  12.     (R.  2950,  2951.) 

AS  TO  POST  OFFICE  DEPARTMENT  EXHIBIT  66. 

Answer.  The  second  part  of  this  exhibit  gives  a  com- 
parison of  the  income  account  with  the  investment  in 
property  for  Exhibit  66,  Form  71.  It  draws  the  same 
conclusion  as  for  the  class  1  carriers,  except  that  the  pas- 
senger revenue  for  the  total  income  account  has  been 
retained,  rather  than  to  use  the  passenger  train  revenue, 
as  shown  on  the  previous  statement. 

Question.  Now,  the  basis  of  this  differs  from  the  other  in 
what  respect  ?     The  first  was  class  1 . 

Answer.  It  is  the  same  exactly,  as  far  as  mail  and 
express  are  concerned,  but  it  gives  a  bird's-eye  view  of 
Form  71  for  Exhibit  66,  including  the  property.  It  sim- 
ply makes  a  comparison  of  Form  71,  Exhibit  66,  showing 
the  return  on  the  property. 

Question,  It  includes  more  carriers  than  class  1  car- 
riers ? 

Answer,  It  includes  the  class  1  and  class  2  carriers  that 
were  able  to  make  reports  in  the  manner  requested  by  the 
Letter  of  Instruction  No,  504,     (R,  2951,  2952,) 

(A)  NET  INCOME. 

Answer.  The  class  2  carriers  are  included  in  this  state- 
ment, which  makes  a  slight  difference  in  regard  to  the  net 
income  and  the  per  cent  of  net  income.  The  express  on 
this  statement  shows  a  net  income  of  $1,062,000  and  the 
mail  $597,000,  as  against  $756,000  and  $822,000,  shown 
on  the  recapitulation  of  Exhibit  66.     (R,  2952.) 

(B)  PER  CENT  OF  NET  INCOME  TO  OPERATING  REVENUES. 

The  per  cent  of  net  income  to  operating  revenues  for 
express  is  shown  to  be  13  per  cent  and  for  mail  13.64  per 
cent. 

Question,  And  what  for  passenger  ? 

Answer.   The  passenger  is  23,16  per  cent.     (R,  2952,) 


447 


(C)  REVENUE  PER  CAR-MILE. 


The  car-mile  rates  for  passenger,  express,  and  mail  are, 
respectively,  30.44  cents,  20.98  cents,  and  22.41  cents. 
This  car-mile  rate  for  passenger,  of  course,  is  for  the  whole 
passenger  revenue,  and  the  passenger  service  train  reve- 
nue will  be  found  at  the  bottom  of  column  8, at  the  bottom 
of  the  sheet,  $56,713,172.44,  which  is  28.15  cents  under 
plan  1  and  under  plan  2  would  be  28.96  cents.     (R.  2952.) 

(D)  PER  CENT  OF  NET  INCOME  TO  PROPERTY  VALTJE. 

The  property  investment  for  class  1  and  class  2  carriers, 
sho-v\Ti  on  these  reports,  was,  for  passenger,  $3,021,778,000; 
for  express,  $433,409,000;   and  for  mail,  $244,186,000. 

The  per  cent  of  net  income  to  investment  for  passenger, 
express,  and  mail  is  shown  as  0.46  of  1  per  cent  for  pas- 
senger, 0.25  of  1  per  cent  for  express,  and  0.24  of  1  per 
cent  for  mail. 

I  will  state  that  the  actual  fraction  of  these  would  be  the 
same  in  the  case  of  express  and  mail — that  is,  it  is  0.245  and 
0.245.  In  the  case  of  express  it  was  raised  in  this  form, 
and  in  the  next  exhibit  we  will  show  it  exactly  as  it  is.  It 
is  slightly  higher  than  the  fourth  figure,  I  believe,  giving 
the  express  the  benefit  of  the  doubt.     (R.  2952,  2953.) 

IN  GENERAL. 

Question  (bv  Attorney  Examiner  Beowx).  What  do  you 
deduce  from  tliese  figures  ? 

Answer.  The  exhibits  were  intended  to  bring  out  the 
relationship  of  the  property  to  the  net  return,  as  sho\\Ti  on 
Exhibits  66  and  67,  both  of  these  exhibits,  and  we  have 
the  figures  on  Exhibits  66  and  67 ;  we  have  the  figures  as 
reported  to  the  Interstate  Commerce  Commission  without 
change,  and  then  we  show  the  Form  71,  the  actual  express 
and  mail  revenue.  We  have  the  actual  passenger-service 
train  revenue,  and  on  these  two  exhibits  we  make  a  com- 
parison for  Form  71. 

Question.  \Tell,  as  I  take  it,  you  take  the  passenger  rev- 
enue as  shown  by  the  returns  of  the  carriers  to  the  Inter- 
state Commerce  Commission  ? 

Answer.  *  *  *  On  this  Exhibit  Xo.  74,  the  passenger 
revenue  for  the  recapitulation  of  class  1  carriers  is  the 
passenger-service  train  revenue,  and  the  express  revenue 
on  both  parts  of  this  exhibit  represents  the  express  revenue 
actually  paid  to  the  carriers  so  far  as  we  could  find  out 
during  the  month  of  April. 


448 

Question.  And  in  the  same  way  with  the  mail? 

Answer.  In  the  same  way  with  the  mail.  Exhibits  66 
and  67,  Form  70,  were  the  accrued  express  and  mail  rev- 
enues as  reported  to  the  Interstate  Commerce  Commission. 
They  are  slightly  higher  in  the  case  of  mail,  and  also  in 
the  case  of  express;  so  that  makes  a  difference  in  the  net 
income,  so  far  as  mail  and  express  are  concerned. 

Question  (by  Mr.  Stewart).  Mr.  Prentiss,  the  primary 
purpose  of  this  exhibit  is  not  especially  to  show  the  relation 
to  property  value,  but  mainly  to  show  the  relation  between 
revenue,  expenses  and  the  net  income,  is  it  not? 

Answer.  It  shows  the  relation  between  thje  revenue  and 
the  expense,  and  the  net  income,  for  each  of  the  classes  of 
service — passenger,  express,  and  mail. 

Question.  Now,  with  reference  to  mail,  your  conclusion 
as  drawn  from  this  table,  it  might  be  said  that,  following 
out  your  line  21,  the  per  cent  of  net  income  to  operating 
revenues  was  13.80,  and  that  your  railway  operating  rev- 
nue  for  mail  22.35  cents  a  car-mile,  and  that  there  is  a 
net  income,  following  out  your  line  28,  of  3.08  cents  for  the 
mail  service ;  is  that  correct  ? 

Answer.  That  is  right.     (R.  2953-2955.) 

REVENUE,  EXPENSES,  TAXES,  AND  OTHER  EXPENDITURES, 
AND  NET  INCOME,  AND  RETURN  ON  PROPERTY  (ELEt 
MENTS  FROM  POST  OFFICE  DEPARTMENT  EXHIBIT  66), 
POST  OFFICE  DEPARTMENT  EXHIBIT  75. 

Mr.  Prentiss  testified  on  direct  examination  as  follows: 
Answer.  This  exhibit  gives  the  car-miles  for  the  30-day 
period  of  all  the  carriers  from  which  the  department  was 
able  to  secure  reports  in  accordance  with  Letter  of  Instruc- 
tion No.  504. 

The  car-miles  as  shown  are  those  tabulated  under  what 
has  been  described  in  my  previous  testimony  as  plan  2. 
That  is,  the  space  unused  in  mixed  cars  has  been  appor- 
tioned to  mail,  express,  and  passenger,  respectively. 
***** 

The  apportionments  of  the  operating  expenses,  taxes, 
and  other  expenditures  were  made  upon  the  results  of  the 
division  based  upon  plan  2,  so  that  this  whole  exhibit 
shows  the  plan  2  apportionment,  both  as  to  car-miles  and 
as  to  expenses  and  net  income. 

The  property  investment  was  likewise  separated  by  the 
use  of  percentages  based  upon  plan  2,  so  that  each  item 
here  shown  on  this  exhibit  partakes  of  the  unused  space  in 
mixed  cars  as  apportioned. 


449 

Question  (by  Attorney  Examiner  Brown).  Now,  the 
long  and  short  of  it  is,  from  your  figures,  the  passenger 
returns  were  5.57  cents? 

Answer.  5.57  cents  net  income. 

Question.  Per  SI 00,  or 

Answer.  Per  car-mile. 

Question.  Your  express  2.72  and  your  mail  3.06  ? 

Answer.  Cents  per  car-mile.     (R.'2956,  2957.) 
***** 

Answer.  The  revenues  shown  upon  this  exhibit  are  the 
passenger  service  train  revenue,  the  actual  express  revenue, 
and  the  actual  mail  revenue  for  the  month  of  iVpril,  1917. 
The  operating  expenses  for  each  of  the  three  classes  of 
service  are  those  taken  from  Exhibit  66,  unchanged,  and 
the  net  income  for  passenger  is  shown  to  be  $10,905,000; 
for  express,  $1,062,000;  and  for  mail,  $597,000. 

The  propertv  investment  is  shown  to  be,  for  passenger, 
$3,021,000,000";  for  express,  $433,000,000;  and  for  mail, 
$244,000,000. 

Question  (by  Attorney  Examiner  Brown).  That  is  in 
round  numbers  ? 

Answer.  In  round  numbers. 

The  per  cent  of  net  income  to  investment  for  the  passen- 
ger service  is,  thus,  0.36  of  1  per  cent;  for  the  express,  0.245 
of  1  per  cent;  and  for  the  mail,  0.245  of  1  per  cent.  Mul- 
tiply this  by  12  to  show  a  statistical  yearly  rate,  and  we 
have  a  return  for  passenger  service  of  4.33  per  cent;  for 
express,  2.94  per  cent;  and  for  mail,  2.94  per  cent. 

The  passenger-train  revenues  for  passenger,  express, 
and  mail  services  are,  respectively,  28.96  cents,  20.98  cents, 
and  22.41  cents. 

The  operating  expenses  are,  for  passenger,  21.83  cents; 
for  express,  17.07  cents;  and  for  mail,  18.06  cents. 

Question  (by  Mr.  Stewart).  Then  there  is  a  line  for 
taxes  and  other  expenses,  and  then  you  reach  the  net 
income  ? 

Answer.  The  net  income  is,  for  passenger,  5.57  cents;  for 
express,  2.72  cents;  and  for  mail,  3.06  cents.  (R.  2961, 
2962.) 

On  cross-examination  Mr.  Prentiss  testified  that  the 
passenger-train  revenue  shown  on  Post  Office  Department 
Exhibit  75  is  taken  from  Post  Office  Department  Exhibit 
67,  the  same  figure  used  in  Post  Office  Department  Exhibit 
74,  and  eliminates  the  passenger  revenue  other  than  that 
derived  from  the  operation  of  the  trains  themselves;  and 
122693—19 29 


450 

that  the  expense  figure  on  Post  Office  Department  Exhibit 
75  is  comparable  with  the  expense  figm'e  on  Post  Office 
Department  Exhibit  74  and  is  the  same  as  was  used  by  the 
railroads  in  their  exhibit.     (R.  2990-2992.) 

Mr.  Prentiss  further  testified  on  cross-examination  as 
follows : 

Question  (by  Mr.  Wood)  .  So  you  have  included  within 
that  property  investment  that  part  of  the  property  out  of 
which  this  $3,000,000  revenue  which  you  have  excluded 
accrued  ? 

Answer.  No,  sir. 

Question.  Why  not? 

Answer.  Because  this  $3,000,000  revenue  was  incidental 
to  the  services  and  embraces  expenses  which  were  elim- 
inated in  a  great  measure  from  the  entire  ascertainment  on 
Letter  504. 

Question.  Not  for  the  property  investment,  is  it  ? 

Answer.  No;  but  for  the  basis  of  dividing  the  property 
investment. 

Question.  You  have  taken  the  property  investment, 
which  is  assumed  to  represent  all  of  the  property  invest- 
ment devoted  to  the  passenger  service  as  a  whole  ? 

Answer.  No,  sir. 

Question.  And  you  have  figured  on  that  the  rate  of 
return  from  the  passenger- train  service  only  ? 

Answer.  No,  sir;  we  eliminated  from  the  passenger 
property  those  amounts  which  were  entirely  from  miscel- 
laneous physical  property,  and  wherever  there  was  a 
charge  which  was  purely  commercial  in  character 

Question.  Now,  Mr.  Prentiss,  I  am  dealing  only  with 
the  property  investment. 

Answer.  Well,  I  am  dealing  with  property  investment. 

Question.  You  have  the  property  investment  of  the 
carriers  as  a  whole,  have  you  not? 

Answer.  You  will  find,  if  you  will  turn  to  Exhibits  66 
and  67,  that  we  eliminated  $133,000,000,  shown  in  column 
14,  and  there  was  $960,000  eliminated  from  the  equipment. 

H:  :1s  5i=  ^  * 

Question.  But  this  $3,000,000  which  you  excluded  from 
the  revenue  was  earned,  not  out  of  the  miscellaneous 
property  excluded  ])y  you.  the  $134,000,000,  but  it  was 
earned  and  credited  as  railway  operating  revenues;  that 
is,  as  a  part  of  the  earnings  of  the  railway  property  itself; 
is  that  right  ? 

Answer.  Yes,  sir;  except  that  I  would  like  to  make  this 
proviso,  that  it  was  impossible  to  separate  the  property 


451 

values  as  we  were  able  to  separate  the  operating  expenses, 
and  under  the  operating  expense  accounts,  of  course, 
when  wo  made  the  division  on  the  basis  of  car-foot  miles 
between  the  classes  of  service — passenger,  express,  and 
mail — that  ratio  would  be  affected  by  the  differences. 
In  other  words,  those  amounts  which  had  been  eliminated 
would  have  been  taken  out  previous  to  the  apportiomnent. 
That  would  decrease  the  total.  It  might  not  change  the 
ratio. 

Question.  Now,  I  understand  that  you  could  not  appor- 
tion the  investment  in  the  property  devoted  to  passenger 
as  a  whole,  or  to  the  passenger  proper,  so  as  to  exclude 
the  investment  out  of  which  this  $3,000,000  was  earned, 
but  there  was  no  reason  why  you  could  not  include  the 
S3, 000, 000  in  the  revenue  in  order  to  make  the  revenue 
and  the  net  income  comparable  to  the  assigned  property 
investment,  was  there? 

Answer.  No  reason,  and  we  did  it. 

Question.  How  did  you  do  it? 

Answer.  We  did  it  on  Exhibits  66  and  67. 

Question.  Well,  you  did  not  do  it  on  Exhibit  75  ? 

Answer.  No,  sir;  we  did  not,  because  this  exhibit  was 
prepared  for  the  express  purpose  of  sho-snng  it  in  the  same 
lorm  as  reported  by  the  railroad  companies. 

Question.  And  you  did  not  do  it  on  Exhibit  74  ? 

Answer.  No,  sir;  for  the  same  reason.     (R.  2993-2996.) 

On  re-direct  examination  of  Mr.  Prentiss  it  was  sho-\vn 
that  in  Railroad  Exhibit  No.  4  the  railroads  have  given 
the  value  of  the  property  as  of  December  31,  1917,  as 
$18,264,000,000,  covering  all  roads  so  reported  whether 
they  carry  mail  or  not;  that  they  have  apportioned 
$4,854,671,000  to  passenger  regardless  of  whether  such 
roads  represented  carry  mail  or  not;  that  they  have  ap- 
portioned on  a  car-foot  mile  basis  $443,629,000  of  this 
amount  to  the  mails,  and  then  stated  7  per  cent  of  such 
amount  as  a  charge  to  the  mails.     (R.  2990-3002.) 

On  re-cross  examination  it  appeared  that  the  amount 
did  not  include  class  3  roads,  of  which  some  carry  mails; 
that  there  are  a  number  of  class  I  roads  that  do  not  carry 
mails,  less  than  $100,000,000  in  value;  that  it  had  been 
stated  in  the  record  that  Mr.  Wettling's  figures  did  not 
include  value  of  property  of  terminal  companies.  (R. 
3002-3013.) 


452 

WHILE  THE  RAILROADS  HAD  THE  UNIT  PASSENGER  CAR- 
MILE  REVENUE  FOR  THE  STATISTICAL  PERIOD,  THEY 
USED  INSTEAD  FOR  THEIR  PURPOSES  THE  FIGURE  FOR 
THE  YEAR,  WHICH  WAS  LARGER,  BUT  DID  NOT  PRESENT 
THE  RESULTS  FOR  THE  MAILS  FOR  THE  YEAR  WHICH 
WOULD  HAVE  SHOWN  A  LARGER  NET  INCOME  THAN  THE 
STATISTICAL  PERIOD  SHOWED. 

Mr.  Wettling  testified  on  cross-examination  as  follows : 

Question  (by  Mr.  Stewart).  I  think  that  the  railroads 
reserved  and  the  department  had  no  objection  whatever  to 
their  reserving  the  right  to  make  representations  with  refer- 
ence to  the  fact  as  to  whether  April  was  a  representative 
month.     Is  that  what  you  are  referring  to  ? 

Answer.  Yes,  sir.  Now,  we  did  not  choose  to  go  into  that 
in  detail  and  fill  up  the  record  as  to  why  it  is  not  a  repre- 
sentative month.  The  figures  show  for  themselves.  The 
Interstate  Commerce  Commission  have  in  their  hands  re- 
ports for  each  month  and  for  the  year,  and  we  chose  in  this 
final  calculation  to  use  the  average  for  the  year,  which  I 
think  is  a  most  conservative  one,  because  that  average 
itseif  of  29.29  cents  is  itself  depressed  by  the  average 
revenues  per  car-mile  for  mail  and  for  express,  which  we 
think  are  both  underpaid,  and  in  the  case  of  this  29.29 
cents,  your  defect,  if  it  is  a  defect,  in  using  equated  car- 
miles  is  entirely  eliminated. 

Question.  That  being  true  and  the  department  having 
had  no  objection  whatever  to  the  railroads  submitting  that 
evidence  or  any  evidence  they  desired  to  on  that  point, 
I  will  ask  you  why  it  was  that  the  railroads  failed  then  to 
submit  the  results  of  forms  general — and  I  refer  now  to  the 
designation  by  which  they  have  been  known — and  which, 
if  they  had  been  worked  up  and  submitted  to  show  whether 
or  not  April  was  a  fair  month  compared  with  the  year, 
those  forms  general  would  have  shown  a  net  surplus  to  the 
mails  of  $14,928,464.64. 

Answer.  They  most  certainlj^  would  not  have  shown 
anything  of  the  kind.  They  might  have  shown  a  deficit 
for  the  mails. 

Question.  On  your  figures  ? 

Answer.  On  my  reasonable  theory  of  working  out  the 
figures,  yes,  sir.  "^We  are  prepared  to  show  the  figures  for 
the  general  forms  that  you  speak  of  for  the  year  1916,  and 
the  only  two  reasons  that  they  were  not  put  in  was  because 
we  did  not  think  that  they  would  serve  any  good  purpose, 
and  we  did  not  have  the  time  to  finally  tabulate  them. 
We  have  got  them  tabulated,  but  not  typewritten  or 
printed.     I  can  present  any  figures  for  the  year  1916  that 


453 

you  would  care  to  listen  to.  I  have  no  fear  of  them  at  all. 
I  also  assumed  that  you  might,  as  some  of  our  other 
opponents  in  other  cases  have  done,  claim  that  the  year 
1916  would  not  be  a  representative  year  because  it  was  the 
largest  year  that  the  carriers  had  ever  experienced  in  their 
history. 

Question.  It  was  a  year  when  the  revenues  were  higher 
and  the  expenses  were  lower  than  they  were  in  April.  I 
guess  that  is  true. 

Answer.  Yes,  sir. 

Question.  And  if  the  result  of  those  forms  which  the 
railroads  had  insisted  upon  having  and  working  out  and 
having  the  privilege  of  presenting  here  had  been  followed 
out  to  their  conclusion  it  would  have  shown  a  much  more 
favorable  result  to  the  mails  than  the  month  of  April  ? 

Answer.  Well,  I  differ  with  you.  I  want  it  distinctly 
understood  that  the  mails  did  not  contribute  to  that  fine 
showing  of  the  railroads  for  1916. 

Question.  I  beg  your  pardon;  they  must  have  contri- 
buted if  the  expenses  were  lower. 

Answer.  Well,  yes.  I  will  grant  you  the  expenses  were 
slightly  lower.     (R.  1311-1313.) 

ESTIMATED  NET  REVENUES  FROM  THE  MAILS  SO  SHOWN 
IS  MUCH  LESS  THAN  ACTUAL  IF  BASED  UPON  MORE  EXACT 
APPORTIONMENT  OF  EXPENSES 

Mr.  Prentiss  testified  on  direct  examination  as  follows: 

Question  (by  Attorney  Examiner  Brown).  Now,  is  it 
your  deduction  that  that  is  all  right;  that  that  is  proper 
and  sufficient  ? 

Answer.  It  is  perhaps  not  sufficient,  looked  at  from  the 
standpoint  of  the  service  as  a  whole,  on  the  basis  of  a  statis- 
tical ascertainment;  but  from  my  knowledge  of  the  division 
of  expenses,  and  so  on,  I  should  say  it  was  excessive. 

Question.  Why?  I  don't  know  whether  you  can  answer 
that  question  or  not,  but  I  am  going  to  ask  it — why  should 
the  return  be  any  less  on  mail  than  on  the  passenger  as  a 
whole  ? 

Answer.  Well,  for  instance,  there  are  numbers  of  oper- 
ating accounts  and  primary  accounts  in  which  it  is  abso- 
lutely impossible  to  find  out  any  relationship  to  the  mail 
or  express  service.  That  is,  there  are  accounts  in  which 
the  mail  and  express  can  have  no  part,  and  tlu^i  a  division 
of  operating  expenses  upon  the  car-foot  mile  percentage 
charges  to  the  express  and  mail  a  proportion  hi  accordance 
with  the  operation  of  the  train  by  or  alongside  of  those 
faciUties.     They  stand  there.     So  as  to  the  relationship  of 


454 

tho  car-foot  mile  to  the  maintenance  and  operating  costs,  or 
a  great  many  expenses  connected  M'ith  railroad  operation,  to 
my  mind,  there  is  no  comparison. 

^Question.  Now,  take  a  passenger  train  scheduled  to  run 
every  day  in  the  week  throughout  tho  year.  Sometimes 
it  is  filled  with  passengers ;  sometimes  it  is  empty.  I  have 
ricklen  in  a  transcontinental  train  where  I  was  the  sole  pas- 
senger hi  the  Pullman  section  of  that  train.  Now,  take 
your  mail,  that  is  a  constant  thing.  There  is  mail  every 
day,  is  there  not  ? 

Answer.  Yes. 

Question.  That  is,  people  are  always  wi-iting  letters  and 
thev  are  always  sending  newspapers  in  amounts,  and  in  an 
increasing  amount  all  the  time.  Now,  under  such  circum- 
stances your  express  earned  5.57  cents.  Looking  at  it  as  I 
have  to  look  at  it,  in  layman  sort  of  a  way,  why  should  not, 
under  those  circumstances,  the  mail  equal  the  passenger 
return?  You  have  here,  I  notice,  the  express  return  as 
less  than  the  mail.     What  occasions  that  ? 

Answer.  If  you  will  look  at  the  operating  expenses  allo- 
cated on  the  t^hird  line  of  figures  at  the  top  of  the  exhibit 
we  have  there  $5,073,000  allocated  to  the  passenger  service, 
S23,000  allocated  to  the  express  service,  and  SI 32,000  allo- 
cated to  the  mail  service.  That  is  all  the  expense  of  all  of 
these  railroads  that  we  were  able  to  get  reports  from,  that 
they  were  able  to  find  in  actual  expenses,  and  I  don'tjbe- 
lieve  it. 

My  result  of  the  ascertainment  of  these  figures"gave  me 
conclusive  evidence  that  the  carriers  could  havejreported 
more  actual  expenditures  if  they  had  so  desired,  and  there 
were  numbers  of  letters  which  stated  that  the  carriers  did 
not  consider  it  worth  vrhile  to  make  those  facts  available 
to  the  department. 

***** 

Question  (by  Mi\  Stewart).  Do  you  mean  to  say,  Mi\ 
Prentiss,  that  by  reason  of  the  fact  that  they  did  not  make 
direct  allocations  in  many  cases  where  you  think  they 
might  have  done  so  the  department  was  compelled^^to 
apply  the  car-foot  ratio  ? 

Answer.  We  were. 

Question.  To  accounts  which  were  too  high  ? 

Answer.  We  were  forced  to  apply  the  car-foot  mile  ratio 
to  operating  expenses  for  a  proportion  of  the  operating 
expenses,  purely  and  unadulterated  passenger,  absolutely. 

Question  (by  Attorney  Exannner  Brown).  Well,  it 
seems  to  me  you  are  rio;ht  there.  Take  the  case  of  a  mail 
train  which  carries  nothing  else  but  mail.  It  would  amount 
to  more  than  $132,000  on  oiie  railroad,  would  it  not? 


455 

Answer.  It  would. 

Question.  Take  those  great  mail  trains  that  run  from 
New  York  to  Chicago  and  from  Chicago  on  west.  They 
carry  nothing  but  mail.  Take  the  fast  mail  leaving  Chi- 
cago at  9  o'clock  at  night,  with  a  specially  built  car  that 
will  stay  on  the  track  when  the  train  is  running  75  miles 
an  hour.  That  is  special  and  should  be  charged  to  mail, 
should  it  not  ? 

Answer.  Under  a  car-foot  mile  basis,  absolutely  every 
cent  is  charged  to  the  mail. 

Question.  And  should  be,  should  it  not? 

Answer.  And  should  be,  absolutely. 

Question  (by  Mr.  Stew^\.rt).  Referring  to  the  applica- 
tion of  the  car-foot  ratio,  was  that  applied  to  all  the  ex- 
penses of  the  great  railroad  terminals  throughout  the  coun- 
try which  are  maintained  almost— well,  very,  very  largely 
for  passenger  purposes  alone  ? 

Answer.  There  were  a  few^  of  the  companies  which  were 
able  to  separate  the  maintenance  expenses  for  their  ])asscn- 
ger  terminals,  the  account  known  as  station  and  office 
buildings,  No.  227,  primary  account;  but  the  roads  that 
were  able  to  make  this  allo^cation  were  very  few.  and  this 
totaj — I  presume  95  per  cent  of  the  total  was  apportioned 
to  mail  upon  the  percentage  shown  here  as  7.68  per  cent. 

Question.  Well,  briefly  stated,  as  I  understand  you,  it 
amounts  to  this,  that  in  making  this  estimate  of  expense 
the  department  was  compelled  in  a  great  manv  cases  to 
apply  an  arbitrary  ratio,  as,  for  instance,  car-foot  miles, 
to  a  great  many  expenses  in  which  the  mails  are  concerned 
in  a  very  slight  degree ;  is  that  your  view  i 

Answer.  That  is  the  point. 

Question.  And  although  these  tables  show  a  net  inconie, 
for  instance,  of  3.06  cents  per  car-mile  for  the  mails,  if  a 
more  accurate  apportionment  of  the  expenses  could  have 
been  made,  it  vrould  have  resulted  in  a  very  much  larger 
net  income  ? 

A:v;v,-er.  That  is  correct.      (R.  2957-2961.) 

THE  RAILROADS'  SHOWING  AS  TO  MAIL  COST  IS  MORE,  AND 
AS  TO  UNIT  REVENUE  IS  LESS,  THAN  THEY  SHOULD  OTH- 
ERWISE RE,  BECAUSE  OF  THE  USE  OF  RATIO  INCLUDING 
EXCESSIVE  CHARGE  OF  SPACE  TO  MAILS. 

Mr.  Wettling  testified  on  cross-examination  as  follows: 

Question  (by  Mr.  Stewart).  Now,  then,  at  the  foot  of 
column  IS  of  vour  Exhibit  6  the  ratio  for  the  mail  is  stated 
as  9.13S2,  and  this  is  the  result  of  those  allocations  and 
apportionments  referred  to  in  columns  5  and  15  and  totals 
in  your  column  16  ? 


456 

Answer.  Yes,  sir.  That  is  the  final  result  of  the  ratios; 
and  the  9.1382  represents  the  ratio  of  the  total  car-foot 
miles  which  we  lio;urc  has  l)een  furnished  for  the  carriage 
of  the  mail,  and  is  the  ])ropoi'tion  of  tlie  total  car-foot  miles 
run  in  the  ])assenger  train  service  for  the  30  da^^s. 

Question.  Is  this  the  ratio  you  have  used  for  the  mails 
in  making  your  divisions  in  the  operating  expenses,  where 
your  divisions  are  made  on  the  car-foot  mile  basis  ? 

Answer.  It  is. 

Question.  Did  you  use  this  same  ratio  in  determining  the 
part  of  the  investment  in  road  and  equipment  charged  to 
the  mails  in  your  exhibits  ? 

Answer.  liiferentially  that  would  be  so,  because  all 
expenses  are  based  in  part  on  them,  and  then,  in  so  far  as 
that  ratio  is  reflected  in  the  total  expenses,  that  would 
necessarily  fall,  then,  into  the  ratio  as  appUed  to  the  road 
and  eciuipment  costs. 

Question.  It  is  by  the  use  of  this  same  ratio  that  you  have 
reached  the  conclusion  that  the  revenue  from  the  mails 
per  car-mile  is  only  17.8  cents?  I  think  that  is  on  your 
Exhibit  3. 

Answer.  It  shows  on  6  also.     Yes,  sir. 

Question.  The  use  of  the  same  ratio  ? 

Answer.  Yes,  sir. 

Question.  Incidentally  it  is  true,  is  it  not,  that  such 
apportionment  to  the  mails  has  decreased  the  ratios  and 
thereby  increased  the  revenue  per  car-mile  for  all  the  other 
classes  of  service  ? 

Answer.  Yes,  it  works  just  exactly  in  the  opposite 
direction  from  what  your  applications  did. 

Question.  So  that  while  that  application  has  been  to  the 
detriment  of  the  mails  it  has  been  to  the  advantage  of  the 
other  classes  of  service  ? 

Answer.  Yes,  just  exactly  like  you  did  on  the  other  side. 
If  I  have  gone  wrong  in  any  of  these  figures,  that  is 

Question  (interruptmg).  I  am  just  asking  for  the  result. 

Answer.  Yes. 

Question.  Not  arguing  the  matter. 

Answer.  No,  but  ybu  assume  that  they  are  wrong,  but 
I  say  if  I  am  wrong  then  that  is  the  result.     (R.  1300,  1301.) 

THE  UNIT  REVENUE  FIGURES  ON  RAILROADS'  EXHIBIT  NO. 
3  ARE  UNDULY  REDUCED  BY  THE  USE  OF  PRORATED  CAR- 
FOOT  MILES. 

Mr.  Wettling  testified  on  cross-examination  as  follows: 

Question  (by  Mr.  Stewart).  On  your   Exhibit  3   you 

have  reached  certain  unit  figures  with  reference  to  total 

passenger  train  operating  revenues  and  expenses,  express 


457 

revenues,  and  mail  operating  revenues,  on  the  basis  of 
the  use  of  car-foot  miles  equated  to  a  60-foot  car. 

Answer.  Yes,  sir. 

Question.  Xow,  the  effect  of  that  is  to  reduce  the  car- 
mile  revenue  in  all  the  classes  of  service  which  are  performed 
in  passenger  trains.     Is  not  that  correct? 

Answer.  Yes.  The  relationship,  of  course,  remained 
exacth"  the  same  between  expense  and  revenue,  because 
it  affects  the  expense  in  the  same  way  and  to  the  same 
extent. 

Question.  Exactly,  but  revenue  is  something  absolute 
and  certain.  It  is  money  that  the  railroad  company  has 
actually  received,  is  it  not? 

Answer.  Yes,  sir. 

Question.  And  exp)ense,  as  represented  by  these  tables, 
is  not  so;  it  is  apportionecl  and  estimated  expense,  is  it  not, 
in  the  main? 

Answer.  Yes. 

:};  Hs  *  *  * 

Question  (by  Mr.  Stewaet).  So  that,  coming  back  to 
my  original  question,  while  your  revenues  represent  actual 
money  received  by  the  companies  and  as  allocated  to  these 
several  classes  of  service  performed  in  passenger  trains, 
the  expenses  represent  verj^  largely  apportioned  expenses, 
actually  made,  of  course,  for  the  service  as  a  whole. 

Answer.  Oh,  yes. 

Question.  So  that  in  that  respect  expenses  and  revenues 
are  not  really  on  the  same  basis  ? 

Answer.  Necessarily  that  is  so. 

Question.  Then  I  am  calling  your  attention  to  the  fact 
that  by  the  use  of  your  60-foot  prorated  car  the  effect  of 
it  has  been — and  I  am  not  saying  that  it  was  intentional, 
Mr.  Wettling,  to  produce  any  unfavorable  result,  but  I  am 
calling  your  attention  to  the  fact — the  effect  of  it  has  been 
to  reduce  the  unit  figures  for  revenue  which  are  certain, 
and  to  reduce  the  unit  figures  for  expense,  but  inasmuch 
as  they  are  not  on  a  parity,  as  you  have  just  said,  it  does  an 
injury  to  the  revenue  item  ? 

Answer.  No.  I  don't  quite  agree  with  you  on  that, 
Mr.  Stewart.  *  *  *  jf  -^yg  jj^^^j  ^gg^j  ll^^^  lesser  num- 
ber of  car-miles  when  we  made  our  final  calculations 
on  page  3  we  would  have  shown  both  a  greater  reve- 
nue and  a  greater  expense.  The  relationship  would 
have  remained  the  same.  Now  in  Exhibit  10,  where 
these  apportionments  are  made,  the  car-mile  situation 
does  not  come  into  consideration  at  all.  We  use  there 
the  actual  car-foot  miles,  not  the  car-miles.  So  that  any 
criticism   that  might  be   directed    to   the  fact  that   the 


458 

equated  60-foot  car-miles  is  used  rather  than  the  actual 
car-miles  when  calculating  the  final  result  would  not 
apply  to  the  division  between  passenger,  mail,  and  express 
on  expenses. 

Question.  No;  I  disagree  with  you. 

Question  (by  Attorney  Examiner  Brown).  What  you 
are  driving  at  is  this,  that  the  real  pay  that  the  carriers 
received  was  not  on  the  basis  of  21  cents  per  car-mile. 

Answer.  That  is  it. 

Question.  You  received  more  on  some? 

Mr.  Stewart.  That  is  it,  and  I  have  no  reference  to  what 
Mr.  Wettling  is  speaking  of,  the  integrity  of  the  other 
figures  worked  out  on  this  basis. 

The  Witness.  No;  I  understand  that. 

Question  (by  Mr.  Stewart).  But  it  is  a  fact  that  by 
using  a  60-foot  car  you  have  reduced  a  certain  and  definite 
and  ascertained  revenue  and  you  have  made  it  appear  to  be 
a  smaller  amount  for  a  unit  of  service  than  it  actually  is. 

Answer.  Why,  necessarily,  if  you  use  a  larger  number  of 
car-miles  by  adopting  the  equated  60-foot  unit  of  length, 
than  would  have  been  the  case  had  we  used  the  actual 
car-miles.  In  other  words,  if  the  average  car  is  longer  than 
60  feet,  then  we  would  have  shown  a  slightly  higher 
revenue  per  car-mile. 

Question.  Perhaps  you  will  see  what  is  in  my  mind  more 
clearly  if  I  take  passenger- train  revenue  alone,  and  that 
excludes  all  consideration  of  the  mails  or  express.  There 
you  have  passenger  operating  revenue  per  60-foot  car-mile, 
27.5  cents. 

Answer.  Yes,    sir. 

Question.  Now,  evidently  that  figure  is  too  low,  because 
it  is  computed  upon  the  66-foot  car-mile,  and  if  jou  base 
any  conclusion  upon  that  one  element  without  regard  to 
your  expense,  as,  for  instance,  if  you  compare  something 
with  the  passenger  operating  revenue  per  car-mile,  you  are 
going  to  go  wrong. 

Answer.  That  is  true  to  a  very  limited  extent  in  that 
respect,  but  as  a  matter  of  fact  the  real  reason  for  the  dif- 
ference between  j^our  figures  and  mine  lies  in  the  fact  that 
although  we  had  agreed  when  we  came  to  talking  about 
passenger  train  car-mile  operating  expense,  to  use  one 
certain  designated  revenue  against  which  I  have  transcribed 
Exhibit  No.  8,  when  you  made  your  final  figure  you  used 
the  total  passenger  train  operating  revenues,  including 
certain  items  which  we  had  acrreed  to  eliminate."^  Why,  I 
never  could  quite  understand,  and  I  argued  very  hard 
against  the  elimination.     Now,  that  makes  a  difference  of 


459 

$2,800,000.  Of  course,  that  is  also  reflected,  then,  in  the 
car-mile  rate. 

Question.  Now,  notwithstanding  the  fact  that  you  have 
obtained  these  unit  figures  as  I  have  referred  to,  for 
instance,  for  passenger  service,  when  you  reach  the  bottom 
of  your  table  there,  and  when  it  is  advantageous  to  the 
railroad  companies  to  use  a  higher  unit,  you  abandon  them, 
and  you  use  the  29.29  cents. 

Answer.  I  do,  but  I  resent  your  expression  of  the  ad- 
vantageousness  to  the  railroad  company. 

Question.  Don't  you  think  it  is? 

Answer.  I  have  tried  to  express  the  facts.  (R.  1302, 
1303,  1306,  1307,  1308,  1309,  1310.) 

THE  RAILROADS  DO  NOT  ACCEPT  THE  RULE  RECENTLY 
FOLLOWED  BY  THE  COMMISSION  WITH  REFERENCE  TO 
DIVISION  OF  WAYS  AND  STRUCTURES  EXPENSES. 

Mr.  Wettling  testified  on  cross-examination  as  follows: 

Question  (by  Mr.  Stewart)  .  Now,  is  it  not  true  that 
there  are  many  accounts  under  way  and  maintenance  of 
structures  that  are  not  influenced  in  the  slightest  degree  by 
this  element  that  you  have  used  ? 

Answer.  By  the  car-foot  miles  or  the  locomotive  ton- 
miles  ? 

Question.  Yes. 

Answer.  Oh,  there  are  many  elements  throughout  that 
are  not  directly  influenced  by  any  theory  or  any  ratio  or 
any  plan  that  you  might  want  to  adopt.  It  is  impossible 
to  reach  any  single  plan  that  would  absolutely  reflect  the 
exact  conditions  as  between  every  account.  We  make  no 
pretense  that  any  one  of  these  plans  would  absolutely 
reflect  that.  There  are,  in  the  maintenance  of  way  and 
structures  accounts,  millions  of  dollars  that  are  not  affected 
even  by  the  running  of  the  locomotive  over  the  tracks  or 
the  running  of  the  cars  or  mail  cars  or  anything  else.  The 
weather  has  a  great  deal  to  do  with  our  depreciation,  or, 
rather,  maintenance  of  way  and  structures  cost.  But 
something,  some  part  of  the  traffic,  must  bear  its  share  of 
that  cost,  whatever  the  reason  is,  and  we  know  of  no  better 
way  than  to  distribute  in  accordance  with  the  use  that  the 
property  has  of  the  whole. 

Question.  But  the  commission  seemed  to  believe  that  this 
direct  train  charge  was  a  better  measurement  of  use  than 
the  locomotive  ton-mile  formula.  Now,  what  lias  led  you 
to  think  that  the  locomotive  ton-mile  formula  measures 
the  use  now  better  than  it  did  in  the  Western  Passenger 
case  ? 


460 

Answer.  I  don't  think  any  differently  than  I  did  then.  I 
still  maintain  the  position  that  I  held  at  that  time.  The 
only  trouble  is  that  the  commission  and  I  can  not  agree  in 
that  respect.     (R.  1314,  1315.) 

THE  RAILROADS'  EXHIBITS  GIVE  VALUE  OF  ALL  RAIL- 
ROADS (EXCEPT  CLASS  III  AND  SWITCHING  AND  TER- 
MINAL ROADS)  WHETHER  MAILS  WERE  OR  WERE  NOT 
CARRIED  THEREON. 

Ml*.  Wettling  testified  on  cross-examination  as  follows: 

Answer.  You  speak,  now,  of  the  total  valuation  that  I 
have  reached  here,  not  the  preliminary  figures  used  by  the 
top? 

Question,  (by  Mr.  Stewart).  Yes.  It  covers  the  value  as 
etimated  by  the  company  of  all  the  railroad  property  in  the 
United  States  ? 

Answer.  Well,  I  don't  hke  that  word  "estimated,"  Mr. 
Stewart. 

Question  (by  Attorney  Examiner  Brown).  Well,  it 
shows  the  book  cost. 

Question  (by  Mr.  Stewart).  The  book  cost.  Any  way 
to  get  at  things  in  common. 

Answer.  I  said  that  it  represents  that  reported  to  the 
commission. 

Question.  Therefore  it  represents  railroads  upon  which 
no  mails  are  carried  whatever  ? 

Answer.  Well,  now,  that  is  possible. 

Question.  Ajid  also  represents  freight  roads  upon 
which  no  passenger  train  service  is  performed? 

Answer.  It  represents  all  the  railroads  in  the  Unite  :1 
States,  excepting  only  the  class  3  roads. 

Question  (by  Attorney  Examiner  Brown).  That  would 
include  the  switching  roads  ? 

Answer.  Switching  and  terminal  roads;  yes,  sir. 

Question  (by  Mr.  Stewart).  Could  you  have  ascer- 
tained the  dividing  line  there  so  as  to  have  stated  the 
proper  amount? 

Answer.  Not   with   sufficient    accuracy    or    to    present 
figures  that  I  would  have  had  any  great  confidence  in, 
and  I  did  not  make  the  attempt.     It  is  a  long  study. 
***** 

Question  (by  Mr.  Wood).  Many  of  them  perform 
switching  service  in  connection  with  the  mails,  do  they 
not? 

Answer.  Oh,  yes;  there  are  some  of  these  switching 
terminals  that  carry  some  mail. 

Question.  Whether  they  carry  mail  under  authoriza- 
tion or  not,  if  there  is  any  switching  to  be  done  or  other 


461 

terminal  service  at  terminals  in  connection  with  the 
mails,  it  is  done  by  the  switching  roads  ? 

Answer.  It  is  the  only  way  it  can  be  done  in  places  like, 
for  instance,  St.  Louis. 

Question.  There  it  is  not  included  ? 

Answer.  Absolutely  not. 

Mr.  Stewart.  They  are  not  mail  roads. 

Mr.  Wood.  I  know,  but  it  is  not  included  in  these 
figures. 

Answer  (continuing).  No,  the  switching  and  terminal 
roads  are  not  included.  I  was  mistaken  about  that  when 
I  said  that  it  included  all  roads.     (R.  1320-1322.) 

THE  RAILROADS'  APPORTIONED  VALUE  OF  PROPERTY 
BETWEEN  FREIGHT  AND  PASSENGER  ON  THE  RATIO  OF 
OPERATING  EXPENSES,  BUT  APPORTIONED  THE  VALUE 
OF  PASSENGER  PROPERTY  TO  THE  MAILS  ON  THE  BASIS 
OF  CAR-FOOT-MILES,  A  HIGHER  RATIO. 

Mr.  Wetting  testified  on  cross-examination  as  follows: 

Question  (by  Mr.  Stewart)  .  Now,  I  notice  that  in  ascer- 
taining the  apportioned  value  of  the  property  assigned  to 
the  passenger  service  vou  used  the  operating  expense  reve- 
nue, 26.58. 

Answer.  Operating  expense  ratio,  you  riieanl 

Question.   Yes,  ratio. 

Answer.  Yes,  sir. 

Question.  But  in  apportioning  that  to  the  mails  you 
used  car-foot  miles.  Why  didn't  you  take  the  operating 
expense  ratio  there  ? 

Answer.  Well,  we  tried  to  apply  that  ratio  which  would 
most  nearly  reflect  the  use  of  the  property,  and  the  pur- 
pose of  the  test  made  in  April  having  been  for  the  express 
piu-pose  of  determining  the  use  of  the  property,  relative 
use  of  the  property  in  the  different  services,  and  having 
determined  that  the  car-foot  mile  would  more  nearly 
reflect  that  than  any  other  factor  or  method  that  we 
could  devise,  I  thought  it  was  perfectly  fair  to  use  that 
as  reflecting  relativeh'  the  same  situation  as  between 
passenger,  express,  and  mail  which  the  total  expenses 
assigned  represented  as  between  freight  and  passenger 
train  service  as  a  whole. 

Question.  Would  not  those  same  reasons  apply  to  the 
division  between  freight  and  passenger  ? 

Answer.  Well,  I  have  not  very  much  quarrel  with  you 
about  that.  I  could  probably— of  course  it  would  be  out 
of  the  cpestion  to  get  the  car-foot  miles  on  the  freight  and 
passenger,  and  they  would  not  measm-e  the  service  as 
between  those  two  classes  of  service,  in  the  first  place. 


462 

but.  followino;  your  theory  of  applying  the  expense  ratio 
rather  than  the  car-foot  mile  ratio,  after  we  have  deter- 
niinod  the  passenger,  why,  that  is  a  matter  of  opinion, 
and  I  felt  tliat  the  car-foot  mile  was  proper  to  use,  and 
therefore  used  it. 

Question.  It  is  the  ratio,  however,  which  produces  the 
largest  amount  against  the  mails  ? 

Answer.  I  didn't  even  test  it,  Mr.  Stewart,  so  that  I  can 
not  say  whether  it  does  or  not.  I  will  be  glad  to  make  the 
test  and  see,  if  you  wish  me  to.     (R.  1326,  1327.) 

PRESENT  CONDITIONS  AS  TO  EXPENSES  ARE  ABNORMAL. 

Mr.  Wettling  testified  on  direct  examination  regarding 
his  exhibit  No.  4  as  follows: 

Question  (by  Mr.  Wood).     *     *     *     You  say  that  the 

Eurpose  is  to  show  what  that  would  be  under  Post  Office 
letter  504,  also  on  the  locomotive  ton-mileage? 
Answer.  Relatively  so  on  the  locomotive  ton-mile  basis, 
also,  and  then  for  the  further  purpose  of  the  exhibit  to 
show  what,  under  the  different  conditions   of  operating 
costs,  would  be  required  to  meet  the  present  abnormal 
conditions;   that  is,  as  compared  with  April,  1917.     I  pre- 
sume some  people  might  call  them  normal  as  of  the  pres- 
ent.    There  is  sniall  chance  of  getting  far  behind  them. 
Question.  They  are  abnormal  under  present  conditions  ? 
Answer.  Under  the  conditions  as  they  obtained  in  April, 
1917.     (R.  1048.) 

THE  LOAD  OF  THE  PASSENGER  TRAIN  DOES  NOT 
APPRECIABLY  AFFECT  COST. 

Mr.  Wettling  testified  on  direct  examination  as  follows: 
Yes,  and  those  trains  were  not  calculated  in  the  factor 
of  division  to  get  the  train-mile  costs,  you  see.  Now,  the 
relationship  would  rather  be  reflected  in  the  revenue. 
Under  that  condition  we  would  get  much  more  revenue 
per  unit  in  train-miles,  but  the  difference  in  cost  would 
not  be  very  much.  In  other  words,  we  run  a  train  empty 
or  carrying  passengers  at  just  exactly  the  same  cost. 
"Whether  we  carry  60  or  75  passengers  in  that  train, 
practically  the  cost  does  not  change.  *  *  *  (R.  1060, 
1061.) 

APRIL,  1917,  WAS  A  TYPICAL  MONTH  AS  REGARDS  EXPENSES 
OF  RAILROADS. 

Ml-.  Fell,  assistant  comptroller  of  the  Pennsylvania 
Railroad,  testified  on  direct  examination  as  follows: 

Question  (by  Mr.  Bikle).  Speaking  with  reference  to 
the  full  year   1917,  what  would  you  say  with  regard  to 


463 

April,   as   a   typical  month,  in  the  matter  of  expenses  ? 
Is  it  a  typical  month,  or  is  it  belo\v  or  above  ? 

Ans^.ver.  I  should  say  that  April  was  fairly  typical. 
(R.  2155.) 

BASIC  SPACE  AND  FINANCIAL  DATA  NOT  IX  DISPUTE. 

Mr.  Wettlixg  testified  on  direct  examination  as  follows: 

The  final  result  of  these  conferences,  as  has  been  shown 
in  the  statistics,  was  to  accomplish  the  object  that  we  had 
in  mind;  in  other  words,  our  basic  data,  which  we  felt  was 
possible  to  bring  before  the  commission  at  the  hearing 
here,  agrees  both  as  to  space  and  as  to  revenues  and 
expenses  within  such  a  small  amount  as  to  be  negUgible, 
so  that  I  feel,  and  I  think  the  Post  Office  Department 
does,  too,  that  as  to  the  basic  data  all  controversv  has  been 
practically  eliminated.     (R.  1000,  1001.) 

THE  PURPOSE  OF  THE  STATISTICAL  STUDY  WAS  TO  DETER- 
MINE THE  COST  OF  PERFORMING  THE  SERVICE. 

Mr.  Wettlixg  testified  on  direct  examination  as  follows: 

Question  (by  Mr.  Wood).  What  was  the  primary  pur- 
pose, Mr.  Wettling,  of  this  statistical  study  ? 

Answer.  Necessarily  the  primar}'  purpose  of  the  study 
was  to  determine  the  cost  of  performing  the  service  and 
then  from  that  measure  the  revenue,  as  to  its  adequac}^ 
or  inadequacy.     (R.  1009.) 

DEPARTMENT  OBJECTS  TO  STATISTICAL  AND  ORAL  EVI- 
DENCE AS  TO  EXPENSE  BASED  UPON  PERIOD  SUBSE- 
QUENT TO  SELECTED  STATISTICAL  PERIOD. 

During  the  examination  of  Mr.  Wettling,  Mr.  Stewart 
made  the  following  objection: 

Mr.  Stewart.  Mr.  Examiner,  I  now  repeat  what  I  said 
with  reference  to  Exhibits  4  and  6.  I  have  deferred  any 
objection  to  these  until  the  witness  has  had  full  opportunity 
to  explain  their  purpose.  Therefore  I  have  waited  until 
he  has  finished  his  explanation  with  reference  to  Exhibit  6, 
which  I  say  is  necessarily  a  product  of  No.  4. 

I  now  enter  objection  to  the  reception  and  consideration 
of  such  part  of  Exhibit  4  as  relates  to  any  estimate  based 
upon  a  period  subsequent  to  the  statistical  period  as  being 
incompetent,  irrelevant,  and  immaterial,  and  as  being 
practically  in  violation  of  the  agreement  and  understanding 
made  between  the  Post  Office  Department  and  the  rail- 
roads, with  the  concurrence  of  the  representative  of  the 


4()4 

Interstate  Commerce  Commission,  that  statistics  sub- 
mitted in  this  case  should  be  as  of  the  statistical  period 
March  27  to  April  30,  1917. 

I  also  object  to  all  of  the  testimony  which  has  been 
offered  b}'  this  witness  on  these  points. 

Attorney  Examiner  Brown.  Your  objection  is  noted 
and  you  may  argue  it  in  your  brief. 

Mr.  Stewart.  Mr.  Examiner,  I  also  wish  to  move,  on 
the  part  of  the  Government,  to  strike  out  from  the  record, 
or  that  the  commission  may  strike  out  from  the  record, 
all  the  matters  to  which  I  have  referred,  for  the  saine 
reason. 

Mr.  Wood.  On  behalf  of  which  department,  Mr.  Stewart  ? 

Mr.  Stewart.  The  Post  Office  Department,  of  course. 
(R.  1136,  1137.) 

Also  with  reference  to  express  and  less-than-car-load 
freight  rates  and  comparative  statistics: 

Mr.  Stewart.  The  Post  Office  Department  wishes  to 
enter  objection  with  reference  to  such  of  these  exhibits  as 
have  been  mentioned  with  respect  to  any  computations 
based  upon  any  rates  or  statistics  other  than  those  appli- 
cable to  the  statistical  period.  That  will  apply  to  all  of 
the  exhibits. 

Attorney  Examiner  Brown.  Very  well.     (R.  1182.) 

DEPARTMENT  LETTER  OF  INSTRUCTION  504  WAS  PRE- 
PARED AFTER  CONFERENCE  BETWEEN  THE  REPRE- 
SENTATIVES OF  THE  DEPARTMENT  AND  THE  RAIL- 
ROADS IN  WHICH  THE  MATTERS  WERE  DISCUSSED. 

Mr.  Wettling  testified  on  cross-examination  as  follows: 

Question  (by  Mr.  Stewart).  Referring,  now,  to  your 
Exhibit  No.  3,  the  first  half  of  that,  you  refer  at  the 
top  to  Letter  of  Instruction  504  of  the  Post  Office  Depart- 
ment. I  think  on  your  direct  testimony  perhaps  you 
were  not  quite  exact  with  reference  to  the  preparation  of 
that  letter.  Is  it  not  true  that  that  was  prepared  by  the 
department  after  the  close  of  the  conference  between  the 
representatives  of  the  railroad  companies  and  the  depart- 
ment, in  which  these  various  subjects  were  discussed  ? 

Answer.  Yes,  sir.  I  did  not  mean  to  be  understood 
differently  as  to  that.     (R.  1302.) 


465 
POST  OFFICE  DEPARTMENT'S  PROPOSED  PLAN. 

rFor  full  statement  of  Post  OfTiee  Department's  proposed  plan,  see  Digest  of  Post  OfTice 
Department  Exhibits,  No.  76,  p.  95,  supra.] 

REGULAR  AUTHORIZATIONS,  PARAGRAPH  1. 

Mr.  Brauer  testified  on  direct  examination  as  follows: 
Question  (by  Mr.  Stewart).  Now,  Mr.  Brauer,  will  you 

take  it  up,  section  by  section,  and  state  yery  briefly  what 

it  is  ? 

Answer.  Take  the  first  section : 

All  rei^ular  authorizations  for  full  railway  post-office  cars,  apartment 
railway  post-office  cars,  and  full  storage  mail  cars  may  be  changed  or 
discontinued  at  divisional  points  in  accordance  with  the  needs  of  the 
8er\'ice;  and  for  this  purpose  a  di-visional  point  is  defined  as  one  where 
the  railroad  company  performs  switching  service  in  connection  with 
passenger  train  service,  but  a  change  in  an  apartment  car  authorization 
may  not  be  made  at  such  point  when  the  operating  conditions  of  the 
train  in  question  will  not  permit  it. 

Now,  that,  as  I  would  define  it,  differs  from  the  present 
practice,  in  that  it  would  remove  the  objection  of  a  change 
?rom  a  30  to  a  15,  as  is  now  being  done,  where  the  operat- 
ing conditions  will  not  permit  it. 

Question  (by  Attorney  Examiner  Brown).  Well,  you 
call  all  regular  authorizations  for  full  railway  post-office 
cars 

Answer.  That  is  a  60-foot  car. 

Question.  A  60-foot  car? 

Answer.  Yes. 

Question.  The  post-office  railway  cars,  the  full  storage 
cars,  and  the  apartment  railway  post-office  cars  may  be 
30  or  15  feet? 

Answer.  Yes,  sh\  Now,  the  change  in  the  30  to  the  15 
may  not  be  made  at  any  divisional  point  if  it  interferes 
with  the  operation  of  the  train  seryice. 

Question.  Now,  what  do  you  mean  by  that  ? 

Answer.  Well,  these  instances  that  haye  been  cited  by 
the  witnesses — for  instance,  down,  I  think  it  was,  on  the 
Illhiois  Central,  some  place  down  in  Louisiana,  they  went 
from  a  30  to  a  15,  and  I  think  it  was  demonstrated  that 
there  was  only  15  or  5  minutes'  dead  time,  and  it  would 
haye  necessitated  the  transfer  of  the  mail  and  the  baggage 
from  one  train  to  another,  without  any  labor  facilities, 
without  any  change,  really,  in  the  operation  of  the  car, 
delaying  the  train.  Now,  there  are  yery  many  of  those 
cases.  I  think  Mr.  Gaines  was  asked  about  seyeral  of  these 
cases,  and  asked  if  those  are  not  typical  of  conditions  all 
oyer.     (R.  3386,  3387.) 

122698—19 30 


466 

THE  INTERSTATE  COMMERCE  COMMISSION  SHALL  DE- 
FINE CONDITIONS  UNDER  WHICH  APARTMENT  CAR 
CHANGES  MAY  BE  MADE. 

^Ir.  Brauer  testified  on  cross-examination  as  follows: 

Question  (by  Mr.  Wood).  Now,  Mr.  Brauer,  in  connec- 
tion with  this  post-office  plan,  I  would  like  to  ask  you 
under  your  rule  No.  1,  wherein  does  that  differ  from  the 
practice  which  the  Post  Office  Department  now  pursues? 

Answer.  Well,  it  puts  it  up  to  the  Interstate  Commerce 
Commission  to  define  divisional  points. 

Question.  Well,  if  the  Interstate  Commerce  Commission 
should  adopt  that  rule  as  it  reads,  wherein  would  the  rule 
differ  from  the  present  practice  of  the  Post  Office  Dei3art- 
ment  ? 

Answer.  Well,  as  stated  by  your  witnesses  and  our  wit- 
nesses on  cross-examination,  we  have  not  paid  much  atten- 
tion to  the  changing  of  apartment  cars,  a  30  to  a  15, 
excepting  as  to  meet  the  needs  of  our  own  service.  Now, 
then,  we  %\Tote  in  there  that  such  a  change  may  not  be 
made  when  the  o]>erating  conditions  of  the  train  in  question 
will  not  permit  it.     (R.^3462,  3463.) 

OPERATING  CONDITIONS  PERMITTING  CHANGES  OF 
UNITS  OF  APARTMENT  CARS. 

Mr.  Brauer  testified  regarding  the  conditions  at  Casper 
on  the  Chadron  and  Lander  run,  that  it  is  a  divisional 
point;  that  there  is  25  minutes  dead  time,  being  ample 
time  to  make  the  transfer  of  the  mails  from  one  car  to 
another;  that  the  railroad  has  the  men  there  to  do  it 
(R.  3479) ;  and  stated  with  reference  to  possible  action  that 
would  be  taken  under  the  new  rule,  as  follows : 

Question  (by  ^Ir.  Wood).  Now,  then,  I  take  it  that  you 
think  that  that  authorization  would  remain  as  it  is,  and 
you  would  cut  down 

Answer  (interrupting).  I  would  not  know,  of  course, 
just  what  the  rules  of  the  commission  would  be.  As  a 
matter  of  fact,  whatever  those  were,  of  course  we  would 
follow  them. 

Question.  IVlr.  Brauer,  don't  you  see  that  that  does  not 
help  us  any  ? 

Answer.  They  have  25  minutes  dead  time  there.  They 
have  ample  labor.  It  don't  amount  to  much.  The  dif- 
ference between  the  30-foot  car  and  the  15-foot  car  does 
not  amount  to  much. 


4G7 

Question  (by  Attorney  Examiner  Brown).  That  is,  if 
they  would  run  the  sb-foot  apartment  through  from 
Chadron  to  Lander? 

Answer.  Yes.  It  is  a  very  small  item.  It  is  a  three  or 
four  hour  run  down  there. 

Question  (by  Mr.  Wood).  Now,  then,  if  this  rule  were 
in  effect  as  it  is  proposed  by  you,  what  would  you  do 
with  that  run?  Would  you  run  the  30-foot  car  through 
or  would  you  reduce  the  authorization  to  15  feet,  as  you 
do  now  ? 

Answer.  I  would  go  out  there,  ^Ir.  Wood,  and  if  the 
change  was  practicable — you  are  asking  me  what  I  per- 
sonally would  do — I  would  ask  the  railroad  representative 
to  make  a  joint  investigation  with  me,  and  if  we  could 
make  the  transfer  there  in  compliance  with  the  rules 
I  expect  will  be  laid  down.  I  would  cut  the  authorization 
as  it  is  cut  now.     (R.  3480,  3481.) 

***** 

If  it  was  left  for  me  to  decide  I  would  go  out  personally, 
if  you  please,  and  find  out  just  exacth^  what  the  operating 
conditions  are.  Now,  if  I  felt  that  I  was  inflicting  an 
injustice  upon  the  carrier  by  asking  for  that  change, 
even  though  the  dead  time  is  ample — 25  minutes  is  ample; 
I  can  probably  transfer  the  stuff  alone  in  that  tixe — I  know 
that  I  would  authorize  it  through.  Now  I  would  rather 
be  governed  bv  a  set  of  rules  made  bv  the  commission. 
(R.  3483.) 

Question.  Now,  what  sort  of  practical  rule  do  you  sug- 
gest should  be  made  by  the  commission  in  order  to  fit  a 
case  like  this  Chadron  and  Lander  case,  in  order  to  }f>j 
a  guide  for  you  and  for  us  and  for  the  commission  ? 

Answer,  It  \^dll  have  to  take  the  conditions  into  con- 
sideration, all  conditions — the  character  of  the  train, 
whether  it  is  a  train  like  this  one  on  the  Chadron  atid 
Lander  run,  a  slow  local  train,  or  whether  she  is  a  ftist 
through  train.  It  will  have  to  take  into  consideration  the 
character  of  the  divisional  point,  whether  it  is  simply  a 
water  tank  or  whether  it  is  a  good  town,  plenty  of  help, 
the  amount  of  mail  or  express  to  be  taken  on  at  that  point. 
I  think  that  is  a  big  item.  You  can  often  n  ,ake  a  change 
from  one  car  to  another  at  a  point  and  make  time  by  the 
fact  that  you  have  loaded  into  the  car  that  is  standing 
there  stuff  that  has  accumulated  at  that  pohit.  (R. 
3484,  3485.) 

Question.  Well,  now,  how  do  you  think  it  should  read, 
and  what  do  you  think  should  be  included  in  it  ( 

Answer.  I  will  leave  that  absolutely  to  the  commission. 
I  have  suggested,  in  just  a  broad  way,  what  I  think  should 


408 

be  taken  into  consideration;  but  those  things  would  appeal 
to  anv  man  without  mv  having  made  the  suggestion. 
(R.  8487.)  J        , 

Question.  And  you  would  not  care  to  undertake  to 
suggest  on  the  stand  what  practical  provisions  should  be 
written  into  that  rule  in  order  that  it  may  be  a  definite 
rule  ? 

Answer.  No.     I  think  the  commission  will  take  care  of 

that. 

Question.  And  you  have  not  anything  to  suggest  to  the 
commission  in  that  regard  ? 

Answer.  Well,  I  have  made  suggestions  as  to  what  1 
thought  should  be  taken  into  consideration,  then  the  rules 
made  along  that  line.  Now,  I  can  not  go  into  further 
details  on  that. 

Question.  As  I  understand  your  suggestion  it  amounts 
to  this,  that  the  rule  should  be  that  there  should  be  taken 
into  consideration  the  character  of  the  train  and  the  time 
consumed  and  the  availability  of  the  transfer  forces,  and 
the  volume  of  the  mail 

Attorney  Examiner  Brown.  No;  that  is  not  as  far  as 
he  went.  He  went  further  than  that.  He  said  where  it 
would  interfere  with  the  schedule  of  the  train,  where  they 
didn't  have  men  there  to  perform  the  service.  There 
were  quite  a  number  of  things  might  occur,  but  those  are 
two  that  you  have  not  included  among  his  suggestions 
that  he  made  yesterday.      (R.  3488,  3489.) 

***** 

Attornev  Examiner  Brown.  Why,  gentlemen,  when  you 
come  to  think  about  it,  in  a  case  of  the  magnitude  of  this, 
when  the  commission  issues  an  order  in  this  case  and  it  is 
put  out  and  tried  in  actual  practice,  *  *  *  I  would 
be  justified  in  expressing  the  opinion  that  when  you  come  to 
operate  it  you  will  find  it  inequitable  in  some  respects,  and 
vou  will  have  to  come  back  to  the  commission  to  get  it 
changed.  That  is  about  the  size  of  it.  You  can  not  fit 
every  condition  that  is  going  to  arise.  It  is  a  physical 
impossibility.     The  commission  can  not  do  it. 

Mr.  Wood.  That  is  so,  it  seems  to  me. 

Attorney  Examiner  Brown.  Now,  that  being  so,  we 
have  got  to  try  it  first;  then  if  the  thing  does  not  work 
right, If  it  is  inequitable  and  unjust  to  the  carrier  or  in- 
equitable and  unjust  to  the  Government,  why,  they  will 
have  to  come  to  the  commission,  reopen  the  case,  and  say, 
"Here  is  a  situation  that  you  did  not  think  about.  Here 
is  a  situation  that  is  unjust,  and  we  want  to  change  it 
this  way."     (R.  3492,  3493.) 


469 

Answer.  I  don't  think  it  will  be  difficult  for  the  commis- 
sion to  issue  an  order  that  will  l)e  lived  up  to  and  that  will 
fit  99.99  per  cent  of  the  cases.  Now,  that  is  my  opinion. 
I  am  not  ^oing  to  say  how  I  would  write  that  rule,  nor  I 
am  not  going  to  sit  down  here  and  try  to  write  any  rules. 
It  is  too  big  a  job  on  a  minute's  notice. 

Question  (by  Mr.  Wood).  You  are  not  going -to  make  to 
the  commission  any  suggestion? 

Answer.  I  have  made  that. 

Question.  You  are  not  going  to  suggest  what  the  rule 
should  be  which  would  fit  these  ninety-nine  out  of  a 
hundred  cases  >. 

Answer.  I   am   not  going   to  suggest   any  rule   to   the 
commission.     The  examiner  asked  me,  I  1  elieve,  what  to 
take  into  consideration,  and  I  made  a  few  suggestions. 
(R.  3494,  3495.) 
CHANGING  FROM  60-FOOT  CAR  TO  30-FOOT  APARTMENT. 

Mr.  Brauer  testified  on  cross-examination  as  follows: 

Answer.  Oh,  it  does  not  affect  the  transfer  of  baggage 
and  express.  That  is  the  big  thing.  You  take  and  switch  in 
a  60-foot  car;  it  is  simply  a  switching  operation,  a  very 
different  operation.      (R.  3510.) 

Answer.  Well,  briefly,  we  hold  this,  that  where  a  com- 
pany performs  switching  in  connection  with  one  or  more 
trains,  passenger  trains,  it  appears  to  us  that  thej^  could 
perform  it  in  connection  with  other  trains.  Now,  in  the 
cutting  out  of  a  60-foot  car  it  is  a  very  easy  operation, 
*  *  *  I  know  it  is  very  important  that  the  department 
have  the  right  to  say  where  the  car  is  to  be  cut  out. 
Now,  we  do  let  them  run  through.  We  do  not  insist  upon 
the  change  where  it  is  not  necessary  at  all.     (R.  3511,  3512.) 

Answer.  I  think  the  Post  Office  Department,  because  of 
the  importance  of  tlie  mail  handled  in  a  60-foot  car,  because 
of  the  nature  of  the  service,  ought  to  have  the  right  to  say 
where  she  shall  be  cut  in  or  out.     (R.  3514.) 

AUTHORIZATIONS  OF  CAR  UNITS  LESS  THAN  FULL  CARS 
WILL  BE  MADE,  AS  AT  PRESENT,  ONLY  AT  DIVI- 
SIONAL POINTS. 

Mr.  Brauer  testified  on  cross-examination  as  follows: 

Question  (by  Mr.  Wood).  In  connection  with  the  units 
of  space  authorization  less  than  full  car,  what  is  the  prop- 
osition of  the  Post  Ofiice  Department  as  to  the  points  between 
which  those  aiithorizations  shoidd  be  made? 

Answer.  Divisional  points.     (R.  3573.) 


470 

DISCUSSION  OF  DEPARTMENT  PLAN,   PARAGRAPH   1. 

Mr.  Brauer  testified  on  cross-examination  as  follows: 

Question  (by  Mr.  Wood).  I  say  would  you  expect  the 
railroad  com])any  to  actually  change  the  car  from  a  60-foot 
to  a  30-foot  when  the  30-foot  baggage  end  would  be  of  no 
use  to  them  at  this  assumed  division  point  where  the 
authorization  is  reduced  ? 

Answer.  That  would  be  up  to  them,  Mr.  Wood. 

Question.  As  a  matter  of  common  sense  you  would 
expect  them  to  run  that  60-foot  car  through,  would  you 
not? 

Answer.  Well,  I  don't  know  as  I  can  answer  that  ques- 
tion. There  is  another  point.  It  all  depends  upon  the 
carrier.  A  great  many  of  these  carriers  are  very  short 
on  30-foot  cars.  Because  why  ?  Because  in  the  old  days 
they  built  60-foot  cars  and  ran  them  where  there  was  not 
anything  but  a  30-foot  needed,  and  for  which  they  got  no 
compensatio2i  at  all  except  that  which  they  got  for  the 
weight  of  the  mail,  and  they  built  those  60-foot  cars  and 
they  run  those  60-foot  cars  with  the  anticipation  that  with 
the  growth  of  the  country  they  would  grow  into  a  40  or 
50  or  60,  and  I  think  it  was  good  business;  but  do  you 
think  that  the  Government  should  pay  for  a  60-foot  car 
while  they  are  waiting  for  the  country  to  grow  up  ?  I 
don't. 

Question.  Well,  now,  going  back,  Mr.  Brauer,  to  my 
question;  here  is  a  line  from  Omaha  to  Denver  on  which 
you  had  in  a  60-foot  car  as  far  as  McCook. 

Answer.  Yes,  sir;  that  is  the  authorization. 

Question.  And  at  McCook  you  reduced  that  authoriza- 
tion from  60  to  30.  The  railroad  company  operates  that 
car  through.  If  they  put  in  an  apartment  car  with  a 
30-foot  baggage  end  it  would  not  be  of  any  service  to 
them.  Now,  certainly,  you  would  not  expect  them,  under 
conditions  of  that  kind,  to  cut  that  60-foot  car  out  and 
put  that  30-foot  apartment  car  with  a  30-foot  baggage  end 
in,  would  you  ? 

Answer.  I  know,  sir,  that  on  that  Denver  run,  that 
under  the  weight  basis  a  60  was  operated  for  a  40  authori- 
zation, from  Omaha  to  McCook,  and  a  30  authorization 
with  no  pay,  except  the  weight  of  the  mail  from  McCook 
to  Denver,  and  the  company  operated  the  60s  on  both  of 
those  trains,  and  have  ever  since  I  can  remember.  I  know 
that  from  McCook  west  we  don't  need  a  60  at  the  present 
time.     (R.  3515-3517.) 


471 

PARAGRAPH  I  OF  POST  OFFICE  PLAN  AS  APPLIED  TO 
FULL  RAILWAY  POST-OFFICE  CARS  DOES  NOT  DIFFER 
FROM  PRESENT  PRACTICE. 

Mr.  Brauer  testified  on  cross-examination  as  follows: 

^Question  (by  Mr.  Wood).  Still  speaking  of  your  rule 
No.  1  and  applying  it  now  to  the  full  railway  post-oflico 
car,  in  what  respect  does  it  differ  from  the  present  practice 
of  the  Post  Office  Department? 

Answer.  It  does  not  differ  at  all.  Full  railway  postal 
cars  handle  important  mail.  If  you  want  to  know  my 
personal  opinion  on  it,  I  don't  think  that  it  is  any  hard- 
ship to  cut  out  a  full  railway  postal  car  where  a  company 
has  switching  facilities,  and  full  railway  postal  cars  is 
space  we  need  to  get  started  in  before  the  trains  that 
they  operate  on  arrive,  and  I  tliink  that  the  department 
most  certainly  should  have  the  right  to  say  where  a  full 
railway  postal  car  shall  be  cut  in  or  out.  They  pay  for 
all  the  space  in  it.  It  is  authorized,  and  there  is  no  c{ues- 
tion  in  my  mind  that  they  ought  to  have  all  the  say  as  to 
where  that  should  be  handled. 

***** 

An  apartment  car  is  a  car  that  we  use  in  conjunction  mth 
the  baggage  and  express.  It  is  only  fan-  that  we  give  con- 
consideration  to  them  when  we  ask  for  the  use  of  that  car. 
We  do  ask  for  it  to  be  set  in  ahead  of  time  at  the  initial 
point.  That  is  not  um-easonable,  and  we  don't  ask,  and  I 
would  not  ask,  that  an  apartment  car  be  cut  out  that  is 
run  from  Cliicago,  say,  tlu'ough  Omaha,  to  Colorado  Springs. 
I  don't  ask  them  to  cut  those  cars  out.  But  a  full  car  is 
a  different  proposition,  easily  understood.     (K.  3509,  3510.) 

THE  DETERMINATION  OF  CONDITIONS  UNDER  WHICH 
THE  CHANGES  FROM  A  FULL  CAR  SHALL  BE  MADE 
SHOULD  REST  WITH  THE  DEPARTMENT. 

Mr.  Brauer  testified  on  cross-examination  as  follows: 

Question  (by  ^li-.  Wood).  Now,  ^Mr,  Brauer,  as  I  take 
it,  your  proposition  is  this:  You  are  willing  that  operating 
conditions  may  be  taken  into  account  under  rules  to  be 
prescribed  by  the  commission  in  the  changing  of  authoriza- 
tions in  apartment  cars  ? 

Answer.  Yes,  sir. 

Question.  But  you  are  not  willing  that  opeiathig  con- 
ditions shall  be  taken  into  account  and  rules  prescribed 
by  the  commission  iii  changing  authorizations  en  route 
on  full  railway  post-office  cars  ? 

Answer.  That  is  correct. 


472 

Question.  Except  that  you  do  provide  that  that  shall 
not  l)e  done  except  at  a  divisional  point. 

Answer.  That  is  right. 

Question.  Now  I  am  not  yet  clear  as  to  what  a  divi- 
sional point  is.  Does  it  include  a  place  where  a  train 
changes  engines  and  crews,  even  though  there  may  be 
no  smtching  done  there  ? 

Answer.  A  divisional  point  is  defined  as  one  where  the 
railroad  company  performs  switching  service  in  connec- 
tion wdth  its  passenger  train  service.  Yes,  where  they 
change  engines,  certainly. 

Question.  That  is  switching  service? 

Answer.  Oh,  yes. 

Question.  And  if  the  switching  service  is  done  on  any 
train  it  is  a  divisional  point  for  all  trahis  ? 

Answer.  Passenger  trahis;  yes,  sir. 

Question.  And  if  any  passenger  trains  change  engines 
there  it  is  a  divisional  point  for  all  passenger  trains, 
whether  the  particular  train  in  question  changes  engmes 
there  or  not  ? 

Answer.  That  is  the  substance. 

***** 

Question.  What  would  be  the  situation  where  a  car  is 
simply  cut  off  from  the  rear  end  of  the  train?  Is  that  a 
divisional  point  ? 

Answer.  That  has  been  held  as  a  divisional  point;  yes, 


Question  (by  Mr.  Wood).  Under  the  Post  Office  De- 
partment's proposal  if  there  was  a  local  train  that  operated 
between  two  points  100  miles  apart  within  the  actual  divi- 
sion points  of  a  fast-mail  tram,  let  us  say,  which  did  not 
change  engines  except  every  250  or  300  miles,  the  fact  that 
there  was  switching  done  on  that  local  train  between  those 
two  points  would"  make  each  of  those  points  a  division 
point.  That  is  my  understanding  of  the  plan.  That  is 
correct,  is  it  not.  Mi*.  Brauer  ? 

Answer.  That  is  correct. 

Question.  Now,  what  about  a  place  where  a  car  is  simply 
cut  off  the  rear  end  of  the  traui  and  there  is  no  switching 
done  in  connection  with  the  train  while  the  tram  is  in  the 

station?  txt-  i  • 

Answer.  I  think  you  refer  to  the  case  down  at  Wichita  i 

Question.  Yes. 

Answer.  That  has  been  held  as  a  divisional  pouit. 

Question.  And  that  the  department  would  construe  to 
be  a  divisional  ])oint  under  this  rule  ? 


473 

Answer.  There  are  ample  switching  facilities  there  at 
Wichita. 

Question.  Well,  did  you  hear  the  testimony  of  Mr. 
Searle  about  that  '^ 

Answer.  Yes,  sir. 

Question.  That  the  switching  could  not  be  done  while 
the  train  w^as  there  without  very  great  delay  and  incon- 
venience? They  simply  cut  the  car  off,  uncouple  it,  that 
is  all  they  do,  but  that  makes  a  divisional  point  out  of  it 
under  this  rule  ? 

Answer.  Yes,  sir. 

Question.  And  the  same  thing  is  true  at  Colorado 
vSprings,  where  there  is  only  a  single  track  in  the  station. 
They  cut  off  a  car  there,  "leave  it.  In  order  to  do  any 
switching  they  would  have  to  go  down  into  the  yards 
several  miles. 

***** 

*  *  *  I  think  all  they  do  is  to  cut  the  car  off  and 
leave  it  there;  nft(U-  awhile,  as  the  regular  operation  of  that 
railroad  terminal  makes  it  possible,  some  switch  engine 
comes  and  gets  the  car.  That  is  a  division  point  at  which 
these  authorizations  may  be  changed  ? 

Answer.  Yes,  sir.      (R.  o542-;io46.) 

INTERESTS  OF  GOVERNMENT  SHOULD  BE  CONSIDERED 
IN  CONNECTION  WITH  CHANGES  OF  AUTHORIZATION 
AT  DIVISIONAL  POINTS  AS  COMPARED  WITH  MINOR 
EXPENSE  TO  THE  RAILROADS. 

Mr.  Knox  testified  on  re-direct  examination  as  follows: 

Question  (by  Mr.  Stewart).  Mr.  Knox,  just  a  ques- 
tion. In  reply  to  one  of  Mr.  Wood's  inquiries,  I  think  it 
might  be  inferred  that  you  thought  the  o])erating  condi- 
tions of  the  railroads  were  not  of  sufRcient  importance  to 
be  considered  hi  connection  with  the  changes  that  might  be 
made  under  jjaragraph  1 .  Now,  I  want  to  ask  you  whether 
it  would  not  be  more  in  accordance  with  your  application 
to  say  that  where  changes  would  be  made  under  jnira- 
grapli  1 ,  the  primary  consideration  would  be  given  to  the 
needs  of  the  Railway  Mail  Service  and  the  Postal  Service ; 
that,  so  far  as  the  divisional  point  is  concerned,  and  the 
conditions  of  railroad  operation,  it  would  be  presumed 
that  they  could  be  readily  adapted  to  those  needs  ? 

Mr.  Wood.  You  do  not  want  him  to  answer  that  ques- 
tion, certainly? 

Mr.  Stewart.  Answer  it.     I  will  leave  it  to  Mr.  Knox. 

Answer.  I  should  say,  in  relation  to  the  ajiswer  to  that 
question,  that  I  had  in  mind  testimony  offered  yesterday 


474 

in  questions  asked,  in  wliicli  it  was  sug^^estcd  tJiat  the 
witness,  in  stating  that  a  GO-foot  car  should  be  set  out  of  a 
train  at  a  certain  point  and  a  30-foot  apartment,  with  30 
feet  storage,  substituted,  a  witness  was  asked  whether  he 
knew  that  the  switch  engine  w^as  not  on  duty  at  that 
hour,  and  also  whether  or  not  he  knew  that  it  w^ould  cost 
the  railway  company  quite  a  bit  to  have  the  regular  train 
engineer  and  train  crew  perform  the  switching  service  in 
the  absence  of  a  switching  crew.  It  is  my  opinion,  in 
relation  to  the  matter,  that  the  interests  of  tlie  Post  Office 
Department,  which  is  conducting  a  public  service,  should 
be  considered  before  any  minor  exp^ise  that  the  railroad 
company  might  come  to  in  relation  to  changing  these 
apartments. 

For  instance,  at  Alliance  it  might  cost  the  railroad  $100 
a  month,  including  everything,  to  change  from  a  60-foot 
to  a  30-foot  apartment.  It  would  cost  the  department 
from  830,000  to  $40,000  per  year  for  some  useless  space 
to  send  that  car  through  to  Bilhngs,  and  if  that  car 
was  sent  through  to  Seattle,  M'hich  it  could  be  in  relation 
to  the  train  rmi,  it  w^ould  come  up  to  $100,000. 

Therefore,  to  consider  these  small  extra  expenses  of  the 
company,  and  even  a  short  delay  to  a  train,  as  against  the 
public  interest,  which  the  Post  Office  Department  is 
taking  care  of,  I  think  is  absurd. 

Question.  That  is  w^hat  vou  meant  by  your  answer  to 
Mr.  Wood  ? 

Answ^er.  That  the  railroad's  interest  in  those  cases  is 
not  of  sufficient  importance  to  be  considered  in  connection 
w^ith  the  Post  Office  Department's.     (R.  3704,  3705.) 

EMERGENCY  AUTHORIZATIONS,  PARAGRAPH  2. 

POST  OFFICE  DEPARTMENT  PLAN  AS  TO  EMERGENCY 
UNITS  RECURS  TO  ORIGINAL  PLAN  OF  HANDLING, 
BY  DEPARTING  FROM  THE  COMBINING  OF  UNITS. 

Mr.  Brauer  testified  on  direct  examination  as  follows: 

"All  units  of  space  needed  to  supplement  regular  au- 
thorizations of  space  shall  be  units  of  3,  7,  15,  or  30  feet, 
without  duplication  or  grouping,  and  such  units  shall  be 
discontinued,  increased,  or  decreased  at  any  point  where  a 
fluctuation  in  the  volume  of  mail  carried  permits  of  a 
change  from  one  unit  to  another." 

Now,  w^e  do  not  have  any  emergency  units  in  distributing 
space.  There  is  no  such  thing,  except  as  it  may  happen 
accidentally.  All  distributing  space  is  regularly  au- 
thorized, but  this  second  paragraph  brings  us  back  to 
w^here  we  w^ere  before  the  issuance  of  letter  123. 


475 

Question  (by  Attorney  Examiner  Brown).  That  per- 
mitted of  the  combination  of  those  units? 

Answer.  Yes;  letter  123  permitted  a  combination  of 
those  units.  I  think  all  the  railroad  men  understand  that. 
I  believe  Mr.  Dempsey,  when  he  was  on  the  stand,  com- 
mented on  that  as  bemg  a  satisfactory  proposition. 
(R.3392,  3393.) 

AUTHORIZATION  OF  EMERGENCY  UNITS  WILL  BE  MADE 
ON  THE  3,  7,  15,  AND  30  FOOT  BASIS. 

Mr.  Brauer  testified  on  cross-examination  as  follows : 

Question  (by  Mr.  Wood).  Passing,  Mr.  Brauer,  to  sec- 
tion 2  of  the  Post  Office  Department  plan,  am  I  right  in 
assuming  that  that  means  that  for  the  existing  emergency 
authorization  which  may  be  made  b}'  grouping  the  several 
units  in  the  57  varieties  covered  by  the  deiDartment's  order, 
the  emergencj^  unit  to  be  authorized  in  addition  to  the 
regular  authorizations  shal^  be  confined  to  3,  7,  15,  and 
30  feet,  so  that  if  more  than  3  feet  is  required  7  must  be 
authorized,  if  more  than  7  feet  is  required,  15  must  be 
authorized,  and  if  more  than  15  feet  is  required  30  feet 
shall  be  authorized  ?     Is  that  what  that  means  ? 

Answer.  That  is  correct. 

Question.  Now,  then,  you  have  abandoned  the  plan  pro- 
posed by  the  department  earlier  in  the  case  to  apply  the 
groupings  to  the  regular  authorizations  as  well  as  the 
emergency  ? 

Answer.  I  don't  know  of  any  plan. 

Question  (by  Attorney  Examiner  Brown).  Other  than 
this,  you  mean? 

Answer.  Other  than  this. 

Question  (by  Mr.  Wood).  Now,  at  page  435  of  the 
record 

Answer.  Let  us  understand  this.  You  say  that  it  was 
planned  to  group  the  distributing  authorizations  ?  Is  that 
what  I  understand  ? 

Question.  No;  the  plan  to  permit  the  regular  storage 
authorizations  to  be  grouped  without  regard  to  these  steps 
from  3  to  7,  from  7  to  15,  and  from  15  to  30,  in  the  same 
way  in  which  the  emergency  authorizations  are  now 
grouped. 

Answer.  I  didn't  understand  that  at  all.  But  if  you 
understand  that  and  understood  that  such  was  the  plan, 
it  is  not  correct. 

Question  (by  Attorney  Examnier  Brown).  Whatever 
was  said  is  merged  in  this  plan  ? 

Answer.  It  is  merged  in  there,  Mr.  Examiner.  (R.3581, 
3582.) 


476 

Question.  Well,  have  the  evils  of  the  grouping  system 
])een  apparent  to  the  officials  of  the  Post  Office  Department 
only  as  they  have  been  brought  out  in  the  conduct  of  this 
case  ? 

Answer.  I  am  satisfied,  Mr.  Wood,  that  if  one-hundredth 
part  of  the  complaint  that  has  been  made  to  the  examiner 
here  had  been  made  to  the  department  it  would  have  been 
cut  out  long  ago.  But  you  saved  it  all  up  to  bring  down 
here. 

Question.  Well,  we  have  had  letters  of  protest  read  here. 
They  don't  seem  to  get  any  very  great  response  from  the 
Second  Assistant  Postmaster  General. 

Answer.  Weil,  now,  I  will  tell  you.  There  is  no  doubt 
but  what  you  could  show  on  trains  all  over  this  grouping 
of  emergency.  It  does  not  amount  to  anything.  The 
carrier  got  the  pay  for  it.  There  was  a  lot  of  bookkeepino; 
and  so  help  me  I  never  heard  of  a  case  in  my  division  until 
I  came  down  here. 

Question.  Now,  if  it  is  such  a  nuisance  to  take  care  of 
it,  why  did  you 

Answer  (interrupting).  It  has  not  been  a  nuisance.  It 
has  been  all  right  in  its  way.  But  it  is  better  done  away 
with.  We  are  going  back  to  first  principles.  This  has 
been  a  big  proposition.  It  was  new  to  us,  all  new  to  the 
Railway  Mail  Service,  new  to  the  carrier.  It  has  been  two 
years  working  out.  It  does  work.  The  two  years  that 
we  have  gone  through  have  been  the  hardest  we  ever  have 
gone  through  on  account  of  war  conditions,  and  this  step 
plan  is  a  very,  very  small  per  cent — 2.81  is  the  percentage 
of  the  emergency  authorization.     (R.  3584,  3585.) 

EMERGENCY  AUTHORIZATIONS,  PARAGRAPH  3. 

AUTHORIZED  UNIT  OF  STORAGE  OR  CLOSED-POUCH 
SPACE  COMBINED  WITH  EMERGENCY  UNIT,  ETC.; 
INTENDED  PRACTICE  UNDER  PARAGRAPH  3  OF 
DEPARTMENT'S  PROPOSED  PLAN. 

Following  extended  discussion  the  previous  day  during 
the  cross-examination  of  Mr.  Bbauer,  the  following  pro- 
ceedings occurred  the  next  day: 

Mr.  Stewart.  Mr.  Examiner,  before  proceeding  further, 
I  wish  to  suggest  the  following  change  in  paragraph  3  of 
the  suggestions  of  the  department  which  were  under  con- 
sideration when  the  proceedings  closed  last  evening. 

Paragraph  3  reads: 

"Whenever  a  regularly  authorized  unit  of  storage  or 
closed  pouch  space,  combined  with  an  emergency  unit, 


477 

necessitates  the  use  of  more  than  30  feet  of  linear  space 
in  a  baggage  or  storage  car  furnished  exclusively  for  the 
use  of  the  mail,"  etc. 

And  the  change  I  suggest  now  is  to  make  it  read: 

"Whenever  a  regularly  authorized  unit  of  storage  or 
closed  pouch  space,  combined  with  an  emergency  unit, 
necessitates  the  use  of  more  than  30  feet  of  linear  space  in  a 
baggage  or  storage  car  used  exclusively  for  the  mail" 

Mr.  Wood.  "Used  exclusively."  You  cut  out  the 
words  "for  the  use  of"  and  change  the  word  "furnished" 
to  "used"? 

^ir.  Stewart.  Yes;  cutting  out  the  words  "for  the  use 
of"  and  changing  the  word  "furnished"  to  "used,"  so  as 
to  clear  up  the  ambiguity  which  seems  to  exist  in  the 
phraseology,  and  wliicn  led  to  some  confusion  yesterday 
m  the  discussion  of  what  it  was  intended  to  mean.  Mr. 
Brauer  will  explain  it. 

*         .  *  *  *  * 

The  Witness.  I  want  to  explain,  Mi\  Examiner,  that  in 
my  testimony  yesterday,  just  before  the  close,  I  had  mis- 
interpreted paragraph  3,  as  it  referred  to  cars  already  in 
the  consist,  and  I  want  to  frankly  state  also  that  it  was  my 
misinterpretation,  and  not  a  change  in  the  department's 
intent  as  to  this  rule. 

The  paragraph  is  intended  to  cover  an  instance  as  was 
recited  liere  by  the  carriers'  witness,  on  Missouri  Pacific  13, 
where  the  regular  consist  had  a  baggage  car  that  carried 
30  feet  of  mail,  and  where  emergency  was  offered  to  fill 
the  car,  and,  under  the  rules  under  which  we  have  been 
working,  this  30  feet  additional  was  paid  for  but  one  way, 
making  a  whole  car  paid  for  but  one  way.  This  change 
would  authorize  that  car  in  that  instance  through  to 
destination  and  back,  and  any  other  cases  of  that  kind. 
(R.  3631-3633.) 

Thereupon  Mr.  Brauer  testified  on  cross-examination 
as  follows: 

Answer.  This  covers  a  case  where  the  linear  feet  used 
in  a  car  furnished  exclusively  and  used  exclusively  for  the 
mail  may  be  in  the  consist  of  the  train,  and  it  goes  over 
30'fcet.  The  car  will  be  paid  for  in  botli  directions,  and 
ncr  change  made  except  as  provided  in  paragraph  1. 

Question  (by  Attorney  Examiner  Brown).  That  is  to 
say,  if  he  had  30  feet,  and  then  there  was  3  feet  of  emer- 
gency or  7  feet  of  emergency 

Answer.  Yes. 

Question  (continuing).  Then  you  would  pay  for  60 
feet  all  the  way  through  ? 


478 

Answer.  Yes. 

Question  (by  Mr.  Wood).  Well,  that  is  not  an  answer 
to  my  question.  I  say  what  you  now  propose,  assuming 
that  it  means  wliat  it  purports  to  mean,  is  a  direct  reversal 
of  the  previous  rulings  of  the  Second  Assistant  Postmaster 
General  in  this  class  of  cases. 

Answer.  Well,  if  you  want  to  put  that  construction  on 
it,  Mr.  Wood.  I  do  not  see  how  it  is  a  reversal.  It  provides 
for  this  class  of  cases. 

Question  (by  Attorney  Examiner  Brown).  Well,  the 
effect  of  it  would  be  to  change  your  practice,  would  it  not? 

Answer.  Certainly. 

Attorney  Examiner  Brown.  That  is  what  he  is  asking 
you  on  that. 

^  sH  *  *  * 

Question.  If  you  have  a  regular  authorization  of  30 
feet  in  a  car,  and  then  there  is  an  emergency  unit  combined 
with  that,  the  department  will  pay  for  a  60-foo,t  car  ? 

Answer.  Yes,  sir. 

***** 

Question  (by  Mr.  Wood).  Then,  I  understand  further 
that,  under  this  rule,  if  we  have  a  regular  authorization, 
we  will  say,  of  30  feet,  or  any  number  of  feet,  which  is 
accommodated  in  the  baggage  car,  along  with  baggage 
and  express,  and  then  there  is  an  emergency  authoriza- 
tion made  of  15  feet  or  30  feet,  and  that  15  feet  or  30  feet 
is  put  in  a  car  by  itself,  used  exclusively  for  the  mail,  the 
Post  Office  Department  will  pay  only  for  the  15  or  30 
feet,  and  only  in  the  one  direction.  That  is  right,  is  it 
not? 

Answer.  Tn  a  special  car? 

Question.  Yes,  sir. 

Answer.  That  has  never  been  the  rule,  Mr.  Wood. 

Question.  That  is  exactly  what  has  been  ruled  on  our 
train  No.  9  in  that  case  I  referred  you  to  yesterday. 

Answer.  Well,  that  was  ^v^ong,  as  I  stated. 

Mr.  Stewart.  That  was  early 

The  Witness.  Yes;  that  was  early  in  the  space  system, 
and  it  was  ^^Tong. 

Mr.  Stewart.  It  never  has  been  the  practice  since. 

The  Witness.  It  never  has  been  the  practice. 

Attorney  Examiner  Brown.  It  is  not  the  practice  no^? 

The  Witness.  No,  indeed. 

Question  (by  Mr.  Wood).  Then  let  us  find  out  a  little 
bit  more  about  this.  On  our  famous  example  of  yester- 
day, 30  feet  authorized  regularly  from  Omaha  to  North 
Platte. 

Answer.  Yes. 


479 

Question.  Thirty  feet  regularly  authorized  from  North 
Platte  to  Cheyenne. 

Answer.  Let  us  make  it  from  Omaha  to  Cheyenne. 

Question.  Ml  right;  make  it  Omaha  to  Cheyenne,  then. 
Fifteen  feet  emergency  from  Omaha  to  North  Platte. 

Answer.  Yes. 

Question.  How  far  does  Rule  3  apply  in  that  case  ? 

Answer.  That  carries  the  60-foot  car  to  North  Platte. 

Question.  Even  though  the  car  itself  may  be  operated 
clear  through  to  Cheyenne,  without  anything  but  mail  in  it  ? 

Answer.  Yes,  sir;  North  Platte  being  a  division  point.    * 

Question.  Yes? 

Answer.  Under  paragraph  1,  the  department  rules  change 
the  authorization  to  fuU  storage  cars  at  divisional  points 
only. 

Question.  Well,  your  emergency  authorizations  may  ex- 
pire independently  of  the  location  of  division  points  ? 

Answer.  This  would  become  an  emergency,  60-foot  car. 

Question.  Well,  emergency  authorizations  expire,  ac- 
cording to  your  rule,  any  time. 

Answer.  Only  the  smaller,  Mr.  Wood. 

Question.  I  do  not  think  it  is  so  stated. 

AnswTT.  Yes;  it  says — I  will  read  it  to  you — emergency 
units  of  3  feet,  15  or  30  feet.  (R.  3634,  3636,  3638-3640.) 
***** 

Question.  Now,  your  rule  No.  3  ? 
Answer.  I  think  that  is  a  fair  proposition. 

*  •      *  *  *  * 

Question.  Well,  you  have  a  program  here  which,  as  I 
understand  it,  contemplates  that  if  there  is  a  regular 
authorized  storage  unit  of  30  feet  and  then  on  some  day 
of  the  week  3  feet  more  are  required,  the  Post  Office 
Department  expects  to  authorize  60  feet,  or  a  full  car,  and 
pay  for  it  in  both  directions  ? 

Answer.  Put  it  the  other  way;  we  only  have  a  3-foot 
authorization,  and  along  comes  30  feet  of  mail.  The  Post 
Office  Department  expects  to  authorize  a  60-foot  car 
through. 

Question.  It  is  the  same  thing  either  way? 

Answer.  Either  way.     (R.  3586,  3587.) 

***** 

Question.  *  *  *  Now,  there  might  be  some  room  for 
interpretation  here.  Here  you  have  this  kind  of  a  case. 
We  might  just  as  well  make  it  hy])othetical,  because  all 
I  am  trying  to  find  out  is  how  the  rule  would  apply. 

Answer.  Let  us  have  an  everyday  case,  then,  something 
that  happens  every  day. 


480 

Question.  Well,  I  don't  know  whether  I  can  give  you 
anything  that  happens  every  day  or  not,  but  we  have  a 
regular  storage  authorization  between  A  and  B  of  30  feet, 
and  a  regular  storage  authorization  between  B  and  C  of 
15  feet.     Now,  that  is  not  an  unusuarhappening,  is  it? 

Answer.  No. 

***** 

Question.  Now,  then,  you  authorize  from  A  to  B,  15  feet 
additional  of  storage  from  A  to  B,  emergency,  in  a  car 
that  already  has  a  30-foot  authorization.  That  makes  45 
feet  out  of  a  possible  60. 

Answer.  No;  I  would  not  authorize  it  that  way.  I 
would  authorize  this  60-foot  car  in  lieu  of  the  regular 
authorization.  That  is  the  practice  that  is  being  followed 
right  along.     (R.  3589,  3590.) 

Question.  *  *  *  Now,  this  provides  that  wherever 
a  regularly  authorized  unit  of  storage  or  closed-pouch  space 
combined  with  an  emergency  unit  necessitates  the  use  of 
more  than  30  feet  of  linear  space  in  a  baggage  or  storage 
car  furnished  exclusively  for  the  use  of  the  mail  a  60-foot 
car  will  be  requested,  and  so  forth. 

Now,  Mr.  Stewart  has  a  number  of  times  pointed  (out) 
that  emergency  units  are  only  authorized  when  thoy  can 
be  taken  care  of  in  the  regular  consist  of  the  train. 

Answer.  That  is  true. 

Question.  Now,  I  assume  that  that  moans  that  they  will 
be  taken  care  of,  then,  where  the  regular  authorization  is 
less  than  60  feet  and  is  accompanied  by  an  emergency 
authorization,  that  they  will  be  taken  care  of  in  a  car  which, 
as  I  understand,  *  *  *  would  be  regarded 
not  as  a  car  operat(vi  exclusively  for  the  use  of  the 
mail,  but  as  a  car  making  up  a  part  of  the  regular  consist 
of  the  train,  even  though  it  may  be  the  contention  of  the 
railroad  company  that  day  in  and  day  out  they  would 
not  have  that  car  except  for  the  mail.     Am  I  right  ? 

Answer.  I  don't  qmte  understand  your  question,  but 
let  me  see  if  this  answers  it: 

Suppose  we  have  got  a  train  leaving  Omaha  and  there 
is  30  feet  of  mail  in  the  baggag(>  car  aiul  the  company  car- 
ries it  in  the  baggage  car  with  Ihc^  baggage  and  express,  and 
*  *  *  3  feet  emergency  comes  along,  and  thei-e  is  room 
in  the  baggage  car  for  that  3  feet  in  connection  with  the 
baggage  and  the  express;  we  would  not  authorize  a  60-foot 
car. 

But  suppose  that  train  starts  out  and  the  30  feet  of  space 
is  there,  going  to  Cheyenne,  and  we  get  3  feet,  or  7  feet, 
or  15  feet  more,  and  there  is  no  room  in  the  baggage  car 


481 

for  it,  and  that  mail  goes;  it  is  a  60-foot  car.     Now  that 
is  as  plain  as  I  can  make  it. 

Question.  Now,  that  does  not  cover,  Mr.  Brauer.  the 
kind  of  a  situation  that  I  have  in  mind,  and  I  think  it  is 
an  important  situation.  The  kind  of  a  situation  that  I 
have  in  mind  is  this: 

There  is  a  regular  authorization  of  .30  feet  between  two 
points,  we  ^vill  say  A  and  B,  and  *     *     * 

***** 

the  railroad  company',  in  order  to  comply  with 
that  regular  authorization,  furnishes  a  60-foot  car, 
and  it  does  not  use  the  other  30  feet.  Now,  then,  it  does 
not  get  pay  for  more  than  30  feet  under  your  plan?  It 
only  gets  the  pay  for  the  regular  authorization  of  30  feet 
in  one  direction  and  nothing  coming  back  ? 
Answer.  That  is  correct. 

***** 

Question.  Now,  there  is  a  car,  then,  that  is  in  that  train, 
in  the  regular  consist  of  it,  accompanied  by  a  regular 
authorization  of  30  feet,  but  without  any  additional  traffic 
in  the  car. 

Answer.  Thirty  feet  to  Cheyenne. 
***** 

Question.  Now  we  come  along  and  to-morrow  an 
emergency  authorization  of  3  feet  or  7  feet  is  attached  to 
the  movement  of  that  car,  *  *  *  increasing  the  space 
beyond  the  30  feet  of  linear  space  which  was  otherx^-ise 
vacant. 

Answer.  Yes. 

Question.  Will  that  be  regarded,  then,  as  a  car  furnished 
exclusively  for  the  use  of  the  mail,  and  a  full  60-foot  car 
authorized,  or  is  it  the  position  of  the  Post  Office  Depart- 
ment that  as  there  is  still  adcUtional  space  in  that  car, 
which  is  a  part  of  the  regular  consist  of  the  train,  which 
the  railroad  company  coiild  use  if  it  had  anything  else  to 
put  in  it,  that  it  is  no  concern  of  the  railroad  company 
(Post  Office  Department)  that  there  is  nothing  else  put  in 
it,  and  that  consequently  that  car  will  be  treated  as  a  30- 
foot  authorization  plus  3  feet  or  7  feet  of  emergency 
instead  of  a  special  60-foot  car,  under  your  rule  3  ?  Now, 
which  would  it  be? 

Answer.  I  say,  if  that  mail  went  and  the  company  was 
required  to  furnish  that  car  for  that  mail,  it  would  be  paid 
for  in  both  directions,  providing  the  railroad  company  did 
not  use  it.  Now,  you  explained  a  case  there  where  they 
didn't  use  it,  as  I  understand.     (R.  3591-3594.) 

122698—19 31 


482 

Question.  Well,  if  you  would  authorize  the  60-foot  car 
under  those  conditions,  then  why  shouldn't  you  authorize 
and  pay  for  a  60-foot  car  in  both  directions  on  those  days 
of  the  week  in  which  the  authorization  is  confined  to  the 
30-foot  regular  authorization  ? 

Answer.  Because  I  don't  need  it. 

Question.  It  is  exactly  the  same  situation  in  both  cases. 

Answer.  No;  you  are  talking  about  a  lot  of  emergency 
mail. 

Question.  I  am  talking  about  a  car  which,  whether  with 
or  without  emergency,  carries  nothing  but  mail. 

Answer.  That  is  not  right. 

The  Reporter  (reading).  ''Well,  then,  it  would  not  be 
right  in  such  a  car  if  you  just  had  3  feet  over  the  regular 
authorization  with  27  feet  left  to  the  railroad  company, 
to  expect  the  Post  Office  Department  to  pay,  under  your 
rule  3,  for  60  feet  in  both  directions,  would  it?" 

Answer.  This  is  an  emergency  proposition. 

Question.  So  far  as  the  railroad  company  is  concerned 

Answer  (interrupting).  If  I  had  3  feet  of  mail  and  all 
my  other  mail  in  the  baggage  car,  3  feet  of  eniergency 
mail  and  it  was  absolutely  necessary  that  that  mail  had  to 
go,  it  would  take  a  60-foot  car  to  haul  the  3  feet.  But 
here  is  what  you  are  doing.  You  are  charging  up  all  this 
space  against  the  mail.  As  I  say,  when  we  have  a  30-foot 
authorization  in  a  train,  that  is  one  thing  that  you  do 
know.  You  know  that  the  department  has  a  right  to  30 
feet  of  that  space  in  those  baggage  cars,  whether  you  use 
it  or  not,  or  whether  the  mail  uses  it  or  not.  Now,  why 
insist  upon  any  further  putting  on  an  extra  car  and  charg- 
ing it  up  to  the  mail  ?     It  is  not  right.    (11.3595,3596.) 

EMERGENCY  AUTHORIZATIONS,  PARAGRAPH  4. 

THE  DEPARTMENT'S  PROPOSED  PLAN  UNDER  PARA- 
GRAPH 4. 

Mr.  Brauer  testified  on  cross-examination  as  follows : 

Question  (by  Mr.  Wood).  Now,  under  your  rule  4,  do 
these  authorizations,  when  they  are  exceeded  60  per  cent, 
require  the  going  to  the  next  higher  unit — does  that  apply 
to  authorizations  in  one  direction  or  in  both  directions  ? 

Answer,  In  the  case  of  the  60-foot  car,  it  would  immedi- 
ately go  in  both  directions. 

Answer.  If  we  had  a  30-foot  authorization  and  60  per 
cent  of  the  time  we  had  to  have  an  emergency  unit,  we 
would  jump  that  to  a  60-foot  authorization,  under  this 
rule. 


483 

Question  (by  Attorney  Examiner  Brown).  And  imme- 
diately you  would  get  paid  in  both  directions  ? 

Answer.  In  both  directions. 

Question  (by  Mr.  Wood).  Now,  suppose  you  had  a  15- 
foot  apartment  car,  and  you  had  emergency  authoriza- 
tions for  storage  units,  and  they  continued  for  60  per 
cent  or  more  of  the  trips,  would  this  rule  call  for  an 
authorization  of  a  30-foot  apartment  car,  or  would  it  call 
for  an  authorization  of  a  regular  storage  unit  ? 

***** 

Answer.  It  only  refers  to  regular  storage  authorizations — 
closed-pouch  authorizations.  *  *  *  ^e  have  no  emer- 
gency authorizations  in  apartment  car  service. 

***** 

Question  (by  Mr.  Wood).  I  say  that  this  rule  4  here  does 
not  take  into  account  apartment  car  or  railway  post  office 
authorizations  which  are  accompanied  by  storage;  it 
only  applies  to  the  storage,  as  I  understand  you. 

Answer.  That  is  what  I  said;  yes. 

Question.  I  understood  you  to  say  just  the  opposite. 
WeU,  what  is  going  to  be  th«  rule  when  you  have  an  apart- 
ment car  authorization  accompanied  by  emergency  stor- 
age authorizations  in  excess  of  60  per  cent  of  the  time? 
Then,  what  rule  applies  ? 

Answer.  The  apartment  car  part  of  it  has  nothing  to  do 
with  it.  The  storage  is  a  separate  proposition.  If  I  had 
3  feet  of  storage  unit  in  the  oaggage  car,  and  60  per  cent 
of  the  time  it  required  emergency,  it  would  go  to  a  7. 
When  the  growth  of  the  mail  brought  that  up,  so  it  began 
again  it  would  go  to  15.  Now,  the  apartment  car  does 
not  enter  into  it. 

***** 

Attorney  Examiner  Brown.  Under  this  rule,  they  would 
not  be  affected — either  the  apartment  or  the  railway  post- 
office  cars. 

Question  (by  Mr.  Wood).  Do  you  propose  any  rule  at 
all  in  connection  with  the  conditions  and  circumstances 
under  which  an  authorization  of  apartment  and  full  rail- 
way post-office  cars  shall  be  increased  to  the  next  higher 
unit  ? 

Answer.  The  distribution  of  the  mails  governs  that. 

Question.  Well,  that  is  quite  independent,  then  ?  The 
railway  post  office  and  the  apartment  oar  authorizations, 
under  your  new  scheme,  are  to  be  quite  independent  of  the 
storage  units  which  may  accompany  them  ? 

Answer.  The  rule  under  which  that  is  governed  is  the 
same  as  it  stands  at  present.  We  have  not  made  any 
change  in  it.    Kule  22  provides  that  if  the  carrier  furnishes 


484 

an  oversize  car  and  a  storage  unit  is  hauled  in  that  car,  in 
both  directions,  the  department  will  authorize  the  larger 
car.  That  is  the  case  exemplified  by  7  and  8  on  the  Rock 
Island  out  of  Omaha.  In  that  case,  we  require  no  more 
than  the  distribution  facilities  of  a  30-foot  distributing  car, 
but  there  is  storage  mail  in  both  (Urections  from  Belleville 
on.     The  car  is  authorized  to  Phillipsburg  and  return. 

Question.  Now,  3'our  rule  22,  as  I  miderstand  you,  con- 
tuiues  in  effect,  and  provides  that  where  a  15-foot  apart- 
ment car  is  sufficient  for  the  distribution  needs  of  the 
round  trip,  and  3  feet  or  7  feet  of  space  additional  to  the 
15-foot  apartment  space  is  needed  in  both  directions,  a 
30-foot  apartment  car  will  be  authorized. 

Answer.  Yes,  su-. 

Question.  A  similar  rule  will  be  followed  m  the  case  ot 
the  30-foot  cars;  that  is,  you  mean  60  feet  will  be  author- 
ized ? 

Answer.  Yes,  su*. 

Question.  So  you  depart  in  your  authorizations  ot  dis- 
tributing cars  from  the  rule  which  looks  to  the  distributmg 
requirements  of  the  department  only  ? 

Answer.  Yes,  sir. 

Question.  And  consider  the  storage  space  that  will  also 
be  required  ?  -o  -    \ 

Answer.  Yes,  su*;  m  both  directions.     (K.  3653-3658.) 

OVERSIZE  CARS,  PARAGRAPH  7. 
THE  DEPARTMENT'S  PROPOSED  PLAN,  PARAGRAPH  7. 

Question  (by  Mr.  Wood).  Now,  what  is  the  meanmg  of 
paragraph  7  of  your  plan  ? 

Answer.  "Whenever  an  oversize  car  is  furnished,  storage 
units  may  be  authorized  therein  on  the  basis  of  actual  meas- 
urement." 

We  authorize  them  therein  now  on  the  basis  of  count, 
excepting  in  the  case  of  the  Pennsylvania  70-foot  cars, 
where  they  have  been  measured.  That  is  what  it  means. 
We  will  measure  the  storage  space  oversize  if  the  company 
sees  fit  to  run  oversize  cars — we  will  measure  the  space  we 
are  entitled  to,  and  use  that  only,  but  if  we  do  use  more 
than  we  are  entitled  to  m  that  car,  we  will  pay  for  it  as 
regular  units. 

***** 

If  we  have  an  oversize  car,  it  is  proposed  that  we 
measure  what  we  are  entitled  to  there,  be  it  3,  7,  or 
whatever  the  regular  storage  that  goes  with  a  15-foot  car, 
or  a  30-foot  car,  may  be.  If  that  car  is  oversize,  w^e  will 
measure  that  space  and  authorize  the  3  or  7,  or  whatever 


485 

we  need,  in  there,  and  get  away  from  the  count  and  pile  it 
in.     That  is  the  intention. 

Question.  If  you  will  apply  this  to  a  specific  case,  then 
I  will  understand  it.  You  have  a  15-foot  apartment  car 
authorization  to-day,  we  will  assume — you  understand  that 
part? 

Answer.  Yes. 

Question.  And  we  will  assume  that  a  30-foot  car  is 
being  operated. 

Answer.  Yes. 

Question.  Now,  under  present  conditions,  if  you  au- 
thorize a  storage  unit  in  connection  with  the  operation  of 
that  car,  you  simply  specify  3  feet  of  storage,  7  feet  of 
storage,  or  15  feet  of  storage  ? 

***** 

Answer.  I  think  I  get  you.     The  specifications  wiU  be 
as  now,  but  it  will  be  measured  instead  of  counted. 
***** 

Question.  You  do  not  propose  to  authorize  any  units 
which  correspond  to  the  exact  measurement  of  the  over- 
size part  of  the  car,  but  only  on  the  units  3,  7,  15,  and  30? 

Answer.  That  is  right. 

*  ,  *  *  *  * 

Question.  Now,  we  have  got  a  car  with  5  feet  of  addi- 
tional storage  space  beyond  that,  which  would  be  at  the 
disposal  of  the  Post  Office  Department  in  a  car  of  the  size 
authorized  ? 

Answer.   I  understand,  I  think,  what  you  mean. 

Question.  And  you  authorize,  then,  in  that  car,  3  feet  of 
storage  ? 

Answer.     Yes,  sir. 

Question.  And  there  is  capacity  for  5.  How  much  are 
you  going  to  use? 

Answer.  I  would  use  3  feet. 

Question.  Who  has  got  to  check  that  up  ? 

Answer.  Why,  it  could  be  checked  up  by  the  baggage- 
man if  he  saw  fit  to  do  so. 

***** 

Question.  Now,  do  you  think  that,  as  a  matter  of  actual 
operation  in  that  car" occupied  exclusively  by  the  postal 
clerks,  they  would  block  off  2  feet  there  in  a  case  of  that 
kind  and  confine  their  use  to  3  feet  ? 

Answer.  I  think  that  could  be  stanchioned  off  very 
readily,  sir.     I  think  they  would. 

***** 

Question.  The  question  which  I  asked  you  is  this:  Do 
you  think  that  with  5  feet  of  space  in  this  oversize  apart- 


486 

ment  car,  occupied  wholly  by  a  mail  clerk,  and  with  only 
3  feet  of  storage  mail,  the  mail  clerk  is  going  to  confine  his 
use  and  his  handling  of  that  3  feet  of  mail  in  the  storage 
space  in  that  apartment  car  to  actually  3  feet  by  meas- 
urement ? 

Answer.  I  think  he  would. 

Question.  You  think  he  would  ? 

Answer.  If  that  car  was  fixed  so  that  he  could  do  it  by 
having  it  stanchioned  properly.  (R.  3669,  3673,  3674, 
3675,  3678,  3679,  3683.) 

SIDE,  TERMINAL,  AND  TRANSFER  SERVICE. 

RAILROADS  SHOULD  CONTINTJE  TO  PERFORM  SIDE  AND 
TERMINAL  MESSENGER  SERVICE. 

Mr.  Stewart  stated  during  the  direct  examination  of 
Mr.  Brauer,  as  follows: 

If  the  postmasters  should  be  required  to  perform  this 
service  generally,  there  is  no  doubt  at  all  in  my  mind  that 
application  would  be  made  to  Congress  for  an  increase  in 
their  compensation  to  cover  that  service.  Now,  whether 
that  increase  would  be  a  proper  measure  of  the  value  of 
the  service  performed  no  one  can  say.  We  know  that 
Congress  is  very  liberal  in  making  appropriations  for  some 
classes  of  employees.  Now,  after  all,  it  comes  to  this 
point:  The  people  have  got  to  pay  this  money,  however 
it  is  arranged  for,  and  some  arrangement  should  be  made 
or  that  arrangement  which  will  be  the  least  public  expense 
and  do  justice  to  everybody  concerned.  Now,  what  is 
that?  The  railroads  are  on  the  ground,  as  Mr.  Brauer 
says.  Undoubtedly  they  could  perform  this  service 
cheaper  than  anybody  else.  If  it  is  turned  over  to  the 
Post  Office  Department,  the  only  manner  in  which  it 
would  provide  for  its  performance  otherwise  than  require 
postmasters  to  do  it  occasionally  is  to  employ  contract 
service,  generally  referred  to  as  mail  messenger  service. 

That  service  can  never  be  obtained  as  cheaply  or,  we 
might  say,  under  the  circumstances,  as  reasonably  as  the 
railroad  companies  can  provide  for  it.      (R.  3420.) 

IT  HAS  BEEN  THE  PRACTICE  TO  REQUIRE  THE  RAIL- 
ROADS TO  PERFORM  SIDE  AND  TERMINAL  SERVICE 
UNDER  THE  POSTAL  LAWS  AND  REGULATIONS 
SINCE  1873. 

Mr.  CoRRiDON  testified  on  re-direct  examination  as  follows : 

Question  (by  Mr.  Stewart.)  Referring  to  this  question 
of  the  side  and  terminal  service,  in  another  phase,  is  it  not 
true  that  the  raib'oads  have  been  performing  this  service 


487 

as  required  substantially  by  the  present  regulations  for  a 
great  many  years,  since,  for  instance,  1873,  at  least? 

Answer     *     *     *     Yes,  sir. 

***** 

Question.  And  that  practice  was  in  existence  at  the  time 
that  this  statute  of  July  28,  1916,  was  passed? 

Answer,  It  was. 

Question.  When  you  said  that  the  department  extends 
the  line  mileage  of  a  route  to  the  terminal  post  ofhce,  and 
that  the  company  received  for  performing  the  terminal 
service  the  Une  rate  pay,  computed  upon  that  additional 
mileage,  did  you  mean  to  say  that  that  is  all  the  company 
receives  for  performing  that  service?  1  am  not  now  re- 
ferring to  the  statistical  ascertainment  of  the  value  of  the 
half  mile  or  the  quarter  mile,  or  whatever  it  may  be,  be- 
tween the  railroad  station  and  the  post  office,  on  which  they 
receive  the  regular  rate  of  pay. 

Answer.  In  addition  to  that,  if  it  is  on  a  space  basis 
route,  they  would  receive  the  initial  and  terminal  allow- 
ance. 

Question.  That  is  for  the  service  at  the  station? 

Answer.  That  is  for  the  service  at  the  station. 

Question.  But  is  it  not  true,  in  the  contemplation  of  the 
law — Mr.  Ashbaugh  has  asked  you  some  legal  question — 
that  the  companies  receive  pay  for  this  side  and  terminal 
service  in  the  aggregate  pay  carried  by  the  regular  hue  rate 
fixed  by  the  statute  under  the  space  basis,  just  as  they  did 
in  contemplation  under  the  weight  basis  before  it  was 
passed? 

Answer.  They  do. 

Question.  I  have  still  a  further  question  on  the  law. 
Are  you  familiar  with  the  Court  of  Claims  case,  where  the 
Court  of  Claims  decided  that  when  Congress  fixed  the  rates 
under  the  weight  basis,  it  had  in  contemplation  the  per- 
formance of  this  service  by  the  raikoad  companies  ? 

Answer.  I  am  famihar  with  that,  as  it  has  been  related 
to  me.     (R.  728-730.) 

ESTIMATED  COST  TO  THE  RAILROADS  OF  PERFORMING 
SIDE  AND  TERMINAL  MESSENGER  SERVICE. 

Mr.  McBride  testified  on  direct  examination  as  follows: 
Question  (by  Mr.  Stewart)  .  Inquiry  was  made  yesterday 
with  reference  to  an  estimate  concerning  this  side  and  ter- 
minal service  based  upon  the  statistics  shown  by  the  re- 
ports of  the  railroad  companies  in  this  country,  and  with  a 
promise  to  submit  an  estimate  before  the  hearing  closed. 
Have  you  the  estimate  ? 
Answer.  I  have. 


488 

Question.     Will  you  please  give  it? 

Answer.  The  estimated  annual  amount  paid  by  the  rail- 
roads represented  in  Exhibit  66  to  contractors  and  the  pro- 
portion of  the  amount  paid  employees  based  upon  the 
figures  submitted' in  Exhibit  No.  56  tabulated  from  the 
reports  of  the  companies  on  Form  R.  M.  P.  No.  5,  is  $1,349,- 
479.42.  That  is  secured  in  this  way:  The  annual  pay  on 
March  27,  1917,  on  the  roads  embraced  m  Exhibit  No.  66, 
tabulated  from  Exhibits  23  and  24,  is  $53,875,175.38.  The 
annual  pay  on  the  roads  represented  in  Exhibit  66  which  ren- 
dered no  reports  on  Form  No.  5  was  $11,539,791.06,  leaving 
the  annual  pay  on  the  roads  represented  m  Exliibits  66  and 
56,  both,  *  *  *  as  $42,335,384.32.  The  total  esti- 
mated cost  of  the  side  and  terminal  service  on  the  basis  of 
exhibit  56  for  the  roads  represented  in  both  Exhibits  66 
and  56  was  $1,060,407.48;  and  by  proportion  stated  as 
$1,060,407.48  is  to  $42,335,385,  so  is  "x"  to  $53,875,175.38, 
which  produces  the  figure  I  first  read,  of  $1,349,479.  (R. 
736,  737.) 

BAILROAD  COMPANIES  PROBABLY  COULD  PERFORM 
SIDE  AND  TERMINAL  MESSENGER  SERVICE 
CHEAPER  THAN  THE  DEPARTMENT  COTJLD. 

Mr.  Brauer  testified  on  direct  examination  as  follows: 

Mr.  AsHBAUGH.  I  should  like  to  have  Mr.  Brauer  give  a 
reason  why  the  Post  Office  Department  wishes  to  retain 
side  and  terminal  messenger  service,  as  indicated  in  the  first 
line  of  that  paragraph. 

The  Witness.  Well,  my  best  judgment  would  be  that  it 
was  deemed,  when  this  paragraph  was  written,  that  the 
railroad  company,  being  on  the  ground,  could  probably 
get  a  better  proposition. 

Question  (by  Attorney  Examiner  Brown).  And  where 
the  Post  Office  Department  had  the  facility,  and  was 
already  doing  it,  that  would  be  the  most  economical  way 
to  do  "it? 

Answer.  Sure.     (R.  3416.) 

WITH  RESPECT  TO  SIDE  AND  TERMINAL  SERVICE. 
Mr.  CoRRiDON  testified  as  follows: 

The  application  of  the  provisions  of  the  act  of  July  28, 
1916,  and  also  a  previous  legislation  with  respect  to 
side,  terminal,  and  transfer  service,  has  resulted  in  in- 
equalities in  compensation  paid  some  of  the  carriers  who 
are  re(juircd  to  perform  side  and  terminal  service,  the  cost 
of  which  is  claimed  by  the  carriers,  in  given  cases,  to 
approximate  the  compensation  they  receive  for  the  trans- 


489 

portation  of  the  mails  by  rail.  In  a  few  instances,  where  it 
was  made  plain  to  the  department  that  the  carriers  were 
paying:  out  disproportionate  sums  for  this  service,  it  was 
seen  fit  to  relieve  them  of  its  performance.  There  are 
approximately  34,323  post  offices  supplied  by  railroad 
routes,  8,548  of  which  are  supplied  by  departmental  mail 
messenfjer  or  screen-wagon  service,  leavino;  25,775  offices 
to  and  from  which  mails  are  transported  either  by  railroad 
employees  or  by  postmasters.  Of  this  latter  number, 
1,076  offices  are  terminal  and  are  located  more  than  80 
rods  from  the  railroad  station,  the  railroads  performing;  the 
service.  The  diversity  m  the  character  and  scope  of  this 
incidental  service  is  marked,  and  renders  difficult  the 
adjustment  of  uniformly  equitable  rates  covering  both  the 
rail  transportation  and  this  incidental  service. 

It  is  believed,  therefore,  that  the  matter  of  fixing  a  line 
rate  of  pay  could  be  greatly  simplified  by  considering  the 
incidental  side  and  terminal  service  as  a  separate  factor; 
the  carriers  to  be  compensated  therefor  by  payments 
equal  to  amounts  based  upon  an  ascertainment  of  the 
value  of  the  time  the  railroad  employees  consume  in 
handling  the  mails  and  the  amount  paid  by  the  railroad 
companies  to  contractors  for  the  service. 

Question  (by  Attorney  Examiner  Brown).  Now,  under 
the  existing  system,  is  that  taken  into  account  ? 

Answer.  It  is  taken  mto  account  m  the  line  pay.  We 
have  paid  one  rate  for  the  entire  mail  transportation. 

Question.  That  is,  that  includes  wagon  service  from  the 
train  to  the  post  office? 

Answer.  Well,  in  some  cases.  That  is  termmal  service, 
as  a  rule,  between  the  terminus  of  a  route  and  the  post 
office,  without  reference  to  the  distance.  That  is  trans- 
ported by  the  railroad  to  the  terminal  office  in  cases  where 
the  department  has  not  relieved  the  company  of  the 
service,  or  where  the  department  has  not  a  mail  messenger 
service  of  its  own  or  under  contract  to  transport  the  mails. 
***** 

Answer.  Of  these  25,775  offices,  taking  away  from  that 
number  1,076,  we  know  that  the  remainder  are  all  within 
the  80-rod  limit. 

Question  (by  Attorney  Examiner  Brown).  And  the 
carriers  are  obligated  to  deliver  within  the  80  rods  ? 

Answer.  Within  80  rods. 

Mr.  Stewart.  Providing  they  have  an  agent  or  other 
representative  at  the  station. 

Attorney  Examiner  Brown.  Wliat  do  you  mean  by 
that — an  agent  of  the  carrier  ? 

Mr.  Stewart.  Of  the  railroad  company,  at  the  station. 


490 

Attorney  Examiner  Brown.  Oh,  do  you  mean  if  it 
happens  to  be  at  a  point  where  there  was  a  local  a^ent, 
or  no  representative  of  the  company,  then  the  department 
takes  care  of  it  ? 

Mr.  ^Y()()D.  Mr.  Stewart,  I  am  not  very  familiar  with  this 
side  service,  and  I  want  to  get  it  clear.  You  say  that  the 
railroad  company  must  do  this  witliin  80  rods  provided  they 
have  an  agent  or  representative.  If  it  is  an  agency  station, 
they  have  to  do  it,  don't  they,  whether  they  would  normally 
have  an  agent  there  at  the  time  required  or  not  ? 

Mr.  Stewart.  What  would  you  mean  by  "an  agency 
station"  ? 

Mr.  Wood.  A  station  at  which  there  was  an  agent  at 
any  time  of  the  day. 

Mr.  Stewart.  Yes. 

Mr.  Wood.  So  that,  if  it  is  an  agency  station,  and  the 
agent's  hours  would  normally  be  eight  hours,  and  the 
schedule  of  the  mail  train  should  be  such  that  the  mail 
would  arrive  or  depart  more  than  eight  hours  from  the 
time  he  originally  went  to  work,  he  would  either  have  to 
come  back  to  deliver  this  mail  or  the  railroad  company 
would  have  to  hire  somebody  else  to  do  it  ? 

Mr.  Stewart.  That  is  right. 

Mr.  Wood.  It  is  only  where  there  is  no  agent  at  the 
station  at  any  time  during  the  day  that  they  are  relieved 
from  doing  it  ? 

Mr.  Stewart.  That  is  right. 

***** 

The  Witness.  Inasmuch  as  this  service  has  heretofore 
and  is  under  the  present  system  paid  for  by  a  line  rate, 
if  this  course  be  determined  upon,  the  total  compensation 
allowed  the  carriers  should  first  be  reduced  by  this  esti- 
mated amount  and  the  line  unit  rates  fLxed  accordingly  on 
the  remainder. 

***** 

Attorney  Examiner  Brown.  I  mean,  you  are  not 
going  to  make  any  extra  charge  for  that;  that  is,  you  are 
not  going  to  pay  the  railroads  anything  above  the  line- 
haul  rate  for  anvthing  that  is  delivered  within  80  rods 
from  the  terminal;  is  that  it? 

Mr.  Stewart.  No;  that  is  not  it — for  anything  that  is 
performed  within  the  station  or  directly  around  it  or  con- 
tiguous to  it,  as,  for  instance,  carrying  mails  from  the 
trains  into  a  terminal  railway  post  office  situated  in  a 
union  station.  That  may  be  considered  as  service  so 
closely  related  to  the  line  service  that  no  delivery  charge 
could  be  made  for  it;  but  when  the  company  takes  the 
mails  from  the  station  and  carries  them  within  80  rods, 


491 

say  30  or  40  or  50  or  60  rods,  to  the  post  office,  that  that 
should  be  separated  from  the  hne  rate  pay,  the  service 
which  that  covers,  and  paid  for  separately  under  this  plan. 

Attorney  Examiner  Browx.  Well,  does  your  plan 
contemplate  that  where,  for  instance,  it  is  necessary  for 
a  railroad  to  bring  in  a  storage  car,  bring  it  into  the  sta- 
tion and  set  it  at  a  point  and  fill  it  with  mail,  then  switch 
it  out  in  the  train,  that  that  service  is  all  included  in  the 
line  pay  ? 

Mr.  Stewart.  The  line  pay. 

***** 

The  Witness.  It  is  believed  that  the  department  should 
continue  to  perform  mail  passenger  service  under  the 
present  regulations,  and  that  terminal  and  side  service 
to  points  within  80  rods  of  the  railroad  stations  should  be 
considered  as  an  incidental  service  to  the  transportation 
of  the  mails  by  a  railroad,  but  that  the  railroads  should 
be  compensated  therefor  separately,  as  suggested,  or 
relieved  of  such  service,  in  the  discretion  of  the  depart- 
ment, in  accordance  with  the  present  practices. 

By  far  the  greater  nimiber  of  these  25,775  offices'  are 
within  the  80-rod  limit,  and  the  service  could  unques- 
tionably be  performed  more  advantageously  by  railroad 
emplovees  in  connection  with  their  other  duties  than  by 
special  contractors  employed  by  the  Post  Office  Depart- 
ment for  the  specific  purpose,  perhaps  at  a  greatly  in- 
creased cost. 

Question  (by  Mr.  Stewart).  Now%  right  there,  Mr. 
Corridon,  it  should  not  be  concluded  from  what  you  say 
that  the  railroad  companies  perform  the  service  at  all 
these  25,000  offices,  but  the  mails  are  carried  at  many  of 
them  b}^  the  postmasters  ? 

Answer.  By  the  postmasters;  yes. 

Question.  And  at  a  great  many  where  there  are  no 
agents,  where  the  department  provides  for  the  service; 
is  not  that  true  ? 

***** 

The  Witness.  Mr.  Stewart,  these  25,775  offices  are 
offices  where  the  railroad  companies  perform  the  service, 
or  the  postmasters.     (R.  616-624.) 

MERGER  OF  RATES. 
SUGGESTIONS  FOR  THE   MERGER  OF   THE    LINE  RATES 
AND  INITIAL  AND  TERMINAL  ALLOWANCES. 

During  the  examination  of  Mr.  Corridon  the  following 
matters  were  discussed : 

Attorney  Examiner  Brown.  Now,  I  assume  that  the 
purpose  of  this  is  that  the  act  under  which  the  commission 


492 

is  oporating  authorizes,  if  it  does  not  direct,  the  commission 
to  say  whether  the  mail  shall  be  carried  hereafter  on  the 
space  system  or  the  weight  system,  and  what  the  payment 
snail  be  for  either  or  whatever  system  the  commission  may 
finally  determine  to  put  into  effect.  This  is  along  the  line 
of  suggestions  to  the  commission  as  to  what  it  should  find 
with  respect  to  the  space  system  ? 

Mr.  Stewart.  With  respect,  Mr.  Examiner,  to  certain 
features.  For  mstance,  the  law  now  provides  a  line  rate 
and  an  initial  and  terminal  rate.  The  department  feels  that 
it  is  in  a  position  to  recommend,  for  instance,  a  union  of 
those  rates,  if  the  commission  feels  that  it  has  jurisdiction 
to  fix  a  rate  in  that  manner,  and  I  thmk  it  has. 

Attorney  Examiner  Brown.  Yes;  I  think  myself,  with- 
out having  carefully  examined  the  statute,  that  it  is  about 
as  broad  as  it  could  be  made — that  is,  it  gives  the  commis- 
sion pretty  nearly  unUmited  power  to  say  what  system  shall 
be  invoked  for  the  future  and  to  establish  the  pay  for  the 
service  under  that  system.     (R.  610-612.) 

INITIAL  AND  TERMINAL  ALLOWANCE. 

Mr.  CoRRiDON  testified  on  cross-examination  as  follows: 
Question  (by  Mr.  Wood).  When  you  speak  of  initial  and 
terminal  service,  or  the  initial  and  terminal  allowance,  you 
mean  a  service  that  is  performed  for  an  ordinary  incident 
of  railroad  transportation — that  is,  the  switching  of  the  car, 
placing  it  at  the  station,  putting  it  in  the  train,  loading  and 
unloading  to  and  from  the  car  ? 

***** 

Answer.  Well,  I  can  tell  you  what  it  is  m  our  service.  It 
is  the  payment  to  the  companies  under  the  present  space 
bill  for  station  service  in  connection  with  the  heating  and 
lighting  and  cleaning  of  cars,  switching,  loading  and  unload- 
ing of  mails. 

***** 

Question.  All  of  these  are  initial  and  terminal  allow- 
ances ? 

Answer.  Yes,  sir.     (R.  633,  634.) 

Question  (by  Mr.  Wood).  When  you  speak  of  terminal 
service,  as  embraced  within  the  expression  ''side  and  ter- 
minal service,"  you  mean  the  service  that  is  performed  by 
a  railroad  company  in  handling  the  mail  between  the  sta- 
tion and  the  post  office  ? 

Answer.  Yes;  on  the  terminus  of  the  route. 

Question.  Or  between  two  stations  in  the  same  city,  for 
the  purpose  of  making  a  transfer  of  the  mails  from  one  rail- 
road company  to  another? 


493 

Answer.  That  is  transfer  service. 

*  *  *  *  * 

Question.  Well,  the  terminal  service  is  a  messenger 
service  performed  by  a  raikoad  company  between  the  sta- 
tion and  the  post  office  ? 

Answer.  Yes,  sir. 

***** 

Question.  Now,  the  side  service  is  a  messenger  service 
performed  by  a  railroad  company  between  the  station  and 
the  post  office  at  a  point  intermediate  between  the  termini 
of  the  mail  route  ? 

Answer.  That  is  correct.     (R.  634,  635.) 

Question  (by  Attorney  Examiner  Brown).  There  is  sti 
another  service,  is  there  not?  Suppose  a  storage  car  be 
loaded  at  a  termmal  pomt.  It  runs  to  a  divisional  point, 
and  there  that  car  is,  while  they  are  changing  the  engine, 
switched  out  to  a  pomt,  and  half  the  mail  is  unloaded  from 
that,  and  then  it  is  switched  back  and  put  into  the  train 
again.     What  kind  of  a  service  is  that  ? 

***** 

Answer.  That  would  be  incidental  to  the  train  run. 

Question.  That  service  would  be  counted  in  the  rate  ? 

Answer,  In  the  rate.     (R.  636.) 

The  Witness.  The  law  provides  for  an  initial  and  terminal 
allowance  for  a  one-way  trip  of  a  car.  Now,  we  must  de- 
termine what  a  one-way  trip  of  a  car  is.  If  it  is  from  New 
York  to  Chicago  the  normal  train  operation  requires 
switching  at  Pittsburgh.  There  is  no  additional  allow- 
ance for  that  switching.  It  is  included  in  the  line  rate, 
and  it  is  only  the  trip  of  the  car.  If,  on  the  other  hand, 
we  ask  that  the  car  be  held  at  Pittsburgh  over  a  given 
train,  in  order  that  we  may  have  more  time  to  load  our 
accumulations  of  mail,  we  pay  an  additional  side  allow- 
ance, because  it  is  contrary  to  the  normal  train  operation. 
(R.  637.) 

IN  GENERAL. 

THE    DEPARTMENT'S    PROPOSED    PLAN    REPRESENTS 
THE  JUDGMENT  OF  DEPARTMENT  OFFICIALS. 

Mr.  Brauer  testified  on  cross-examination  as  follows: 

This  plan  represents  the  best  judgment  as  to  what  should 
be  done  with  the  service  by  the  superintendent  here.  It 
has  been  thrashed  out  in  conference  time  and  again,  just 
as  I  imagine  your  plan  was  thrashed  out  by  the  mail 
traffic  managers,  and  that  is  what  we  present  here,  from  a 
traffic  standpoint. 


494 

Question  (by  Attorney  Examiner  Brown).  And  it  super- 
sedes anything  that  anybody  had  in  mind  prior  to  that  time, 
doesn't  it? 

Answer.  Yes.     (R.  3432.) 

CHANGES  SUGGESTED  IN  POST  OFFICE  DEPABTMENT'S 
PLAN  WOULD  REMOA/E  FROM  CONTROVERSY  PRAC- 
TICALLY ALL  CASES  IN  DISPUTE. 

Mr.  Knox  testified  on  re-direct  examination  as  follows: 

Question  (by  Mr.  Stewart)  .  Now,  Mr.  Wood  asked  you 
whether  these  changes  which  are  suggested  in  this  plan  do 
not  relate  to  that  part  of  the  service  which  involves  the 
lesser  amount  of  pay.     I  believe  you  said  that  was  correct  ? 

Answer.  As  I  understood  the  question,  I  think  I  an- 
swered it  correctly. 

Question.  Yes;  that  is  all  right.  Now,  I  want  to  ask 
you  whether  or  not,  in  your  opinion,  the  changes  that  are 
suggested  here  will  remove  *  *  *  the  larger  part  of 
the  causes  for  controversy  and  contention  between  the 
railroad  companies  and  the  department,  and  in  regard  to 
which  the  large  amount  of  evidence  in  this  case,  perhaps 
the  larger  amount  of  the  evidence,  has  been  adduced  ? 

Answer.  Yes,  sir;  Mr.  Stewart,  I  think  it  would.  It 
would  at  least  remove  practically  all  of  those  cases  which 
have  been  in  evidence  where  there  seems  to  be  a  justifica- 
tion in  the  complaints  made  by  the  railroad  carriers.  (R. 
3705,  3706.) 

THE  RAILROADS'  PROPOSED  PLAN. 

THE  RAILROADS'  PROPOSAL  FOR  RATES  BASED  UPON 
WEIGHTS  IS  A  RETURN  TO  AN  OLD  AND  UNSATISFACTORY 
SYSTEM. 

WEIGHT  PAY  FEATURE  OF  RAILROADS'  PLAN  ANA- 
LYZED. 

Mr.  McBride  testified  on  direct  examination  as  follows: 

This  involves  a  return  to  the  old  basis  for  measuring  the 
service  performed,  and  prescribes  two  rates  for  weights 
carried,  but  different  from  the  old  plan  in  basing  rates  on 
a  ton-mile  basis  instead  of  on  an  average  daily  weight  basis. 
These  rates  as  named  in  the  plan  are  45  cents  per  ton-mile 
for  the  first  100  ton-miles  or  less  per  mile  of  road  per  annum 
on  each  route,  and  5^  cents  per  each  additional  ton-mile 
for  each  route.  In  effect,  these  rates  ])roduce  a  minimum 
rate  or  constant  of  $45  per  mile  per  annum  on  all  routes 
carrying  not  more  than  548  pounds  average  daily  weight 
of  mail,  and  5^  cents  a  ton-mile  for  each  ton-mile  of  weights 
above  548  pounds  average  daily  weight.     (R.  3711.) 


495 

SCALE   OF   RATES  UNDER  RAILROAD  PLAN  NOT  EQUI- 
TABLE AS  BETWEEN  COMPANIES. 

Mr.  McBrede  testified  on  direct  examination  as  follows: 

The  proposed  railroad  plan  suggests  a  scale  of  rates  some- 
what less  complicated,  and  one,  I  think,  that  could  be 
applied  without  great  difficulty,  but  that  it  does  not  pro- 
duce equitable  results  as  between  companies  is  evident 
from  the  fact  that  it  was  found  necessary  to  couple  with 
them  a  so-called  service  rate  for  closed-pouch  service  in 
order  that  the  pay  might  be  raised  to  a  level  considered 
necessary. 

Question.  That  is  on  the  short  lines  that  you  refer  to? 

Answer.  Well,  ostensibly,  that  was  the  reason  for  this 
closed-pouch  rate,  although,  in  actual  practice,  it  results 
in  a  considerable  increase  in  pay  on  other  lines  as  well. 

Question.  A  larger  increase  on  the  heavy  lines  than  on 
the  short  lines  ? 

Answer.  On  those  heavy  lines  which  have  any  great 
amount  of  closed-pouch  service.     (R.  3712.) 

RATE   SCALE  FOR  WEIGHT  UNDER  PRESENT  LAWS. 

Mr.  McBride  testified  on  direct  examination  as  follows: 

This  scale  of  rates  differs  from  the  scale  of  rates  which 
obtained  under  the  laws  effective  previous  to  the  installa- 
tion of  the  space  basis,  which  would  still  apply  on  those 
routes  continued  under  the  weight  basis.  That  scale  pro- 
vides a  minimum  rate  of  $42.75  per  mile  per  annum  on  all 
routes  carrying  211  pounds  or  less  average  weight  per  day, 
and  increasing  such  rate  $1,  less  the  discounts  provided  by 
law,  or  about  85  cents,  for  each  additional  12  pounds  of 
daily  weight  up  to  500  pounds,  the  same  increase  in  rate 
for  each  20  pounds  of  weight  per  day  up  to  2,000  pounds, 
and  so  on;  so  that  as  the  weights  increase,  the  rate  per 
mile  increases,  but  the  rate  per  ton-mile  decreases. 

The  scale  results  in  a  different  rate  for  each  step  of  12 
pounds,  20  pounds,  60  pounds,  SO  pounds,  as  you  go  on  up 
the  scale. 

This  scale,  of  course,  was  complicated  and  difficult  of 
understanding  by  the  layman,  as  well  as  by  some  persons 
who  were  not  laymen,  and  was  one  of  the  causes  that  led 
the  department  to  advocate  the  adoption  of  the  space  basis. 
(R.  3711,  3712.) 


496 

THE  RAILROADS'  PROPOSAL  OF  A  3-CENT  RATE  FOR  CLOSED- 
POUCH  SERVICE  AN  UNNECESSARY  COMPLICATION  AND 
WHOLLY  UNJUSTIFIED  BECAUSE  UNREASONABLE. 

THE   RAILROADS'  PROPOSED   PLAN,  THE   3-CENT  RATE 
FOR  CLOSED-POUCH  SERVICE. 

Mr.  WoRTHiNGTON  testified  on  cross-examination  as  fol- 
lows : 

Question  (by  Mr.  Stewart).  Referring  to  your  3  cents 
per  mile  rate,  do  you  propose  that  that  shall  apply  to  closed- 
pouch  trains  on  every  road,  regardless  of  whether  they  are 
short  Imes  or  branch  lines  or  other  roads  ? 

Answer.  Yes,  sir;  because  the  purpose  of  that  rate  is 
quite  different  than  the  other  rate.  It  was  to  take  care 
of  the  extra  labor  of  the  baggagemen  in  connection  with 
handling  the  closed-pouch  service.     *     *     * 

Question.  Have  you  estimated  the  amount  that  that 
would  carry  ? 

Answer.  I  have  an  estimate  of  it,  amounting  to  about 
practically    $4,000,000    a    year    out   of    the    $95,000,000. 

4c  *  ,  *  *  * 

Question.  Is  it  the  purpose  to  cover  storage  mail  as  well 
as  the  closed-pouch  mail  ? 

Answer.  No,  sir. 

Question.  In  small  units  ? 

Answer.  No,  sir;  it  does  not  cover  the  storage  mail. 

Question.  It  is  probably  true,  however,  Mr.  Worthing- 
ton,  that  on  a  great  many  of  these  closed-pouch  routes 
there  would  be  very  few  pouches  handled,  is  it  not  ? 

Answer.  I  do  not  know  the  distribution  of  traffic  on  the 
closed-pouch  routes  as  to  the  number  of  pouches.  I  could 
not  answer  that  question.  I  presume  it  varies  on  different 
routes,  but  the  services  of  the  man  are  very  much  the 
same — the  man  in  charge. 

Question  (by  Attorney-Examiner  Brown).  Well,  take 
such  a  route,  for  instance,  as  Mr.  Stewart  spoke  of  the 
other  day,  1,600  miles.  There  you  would  have  to  pay  for 
two  men,  perhaps,  or  for  three  men — I  don't  know  how 
many  it  would  take— $48  on  this  basis.  On  a  100-mile 
branch  line  it  would  be  $3 

Mr.  Stewart.  We  expect  to  submit  evidence  along  those 
lines,  Mr.  Examiner,  showing  the  exorbitant  pay  the  rail- 
roads would  receive  per  hour  of  service  for  the  baggage- 
man, for  instance,  who  handles  it. 

***** 


497 

Question  (by  Mr.  Stewart).  Now,  is  it  also  intended 
that  this  3-cent  rate  will  be  in  addition  to  the  charge  for 
weight  provided  for? 

Answer.  Yes,  sir;  that  is  why  it  is  put  in  there,  Mr. 
Stewart.     (R.  1600,  1661,  1662,  1663.) 

THREE-CENT  MILE  RATE  FOR  CLOSED-POUCH  TRAINS 
WOULD  TEND  TO  DISCOURAGE  FREQUENCY  OF  SERV- 
ICE ON  ACCOUNT  OF  ITS  COST. 

Mr.  McBride  testified  on  direct  examination  as  follows: 

Question  (by  Mr.  Stewart).  Referring  now  to  the 
feature  of  the  railroads'  plan  in  regard  to  the  3-cent  rate. 
What  have  you  to  say  in  regard  to  that  ? 

Answer.  The  carriers'  plan  provides  that  on  short-line 
railroads  or  branch  trains  of  other  railroads  not  above 
designated,  where  there  are  no  postal  clerks  on  the  trains^ 
and  mails  are  carried  in  the  baggage  car  and  handled  ex- 
clusively by  the  baggageman,  with  a  record  thereof  at  the 
local  stations,  and  the  handlhig  does  not  partake  of  the 
character  of  compact  loading  as  for  storage  mail  for  storing 
in  baggage  cars,  an  additional  service  rate  of  3  cents  per 
train-mile  should  be  paid. 

Simplified,  this  section  specifies  that  (as)  additional  pay 
for  the  weight  transported  in  such  trains  the  company 
shall  be  paid  at  the  rate  of  3  cents  a  mile  for  the  carriage 
of  the  mail  carried  in  all  trains  in  which  no  postal  clerks 
are  employed  and  the  baggagemen  handle  the  mails. 

The  first  objection  to  this  provision  is  that  it  would,  I 
think,  tend  to  discourage  frequency  of  service  on  some 
lines  because  of  its  cost.  On  the  large  trunk  lines  out  of 
the  large  cities  there  is  a  considerable  amount  of  service 
that  would  come  under  this  classification.  This  service  has 
been  established  for  the  purpose  of  giving  more  frequent 
mails  between  these  large  cities,  and  to  take  care  of  sub- 
urban points,  more  frequent  service  than  could  be  pro- 
vided by  the  trains  carrying  the  distributing  cars. 

Question  (by  Attorney-Examiner  Brown).  Would  you 
read  that  rule  again  ?  I  did  not  catch  that,  that  it  applied 
to  the  main  line  at  all. 

Answer.  "On  short-line  railroads  or  branch  trains  or 
other  railroads  not  above  designated,  where  there  are  no 
postal  clerks  on  the  trains." 

Question.  When  you  speak  of  this  transfer  between 
terminals  it  would  be  branch  trains  that  would  have  to  run 
out  on  a  branch.     They  could  not  run  on  the  main  line? 

122698 — 19 32 


498 

Answer.  Oh,  there  are  a  great  many  closed-pouch  trains 
on  main  hnes,  and  I  construe  tliis  to  mean  that  this  rate 
would  apply  on  those  trains  as  well  as  on  branch  lines, 

Attorney-Examiner  Brown.  The  rule  does  not  so  state, 
does  it  ? 

Mr.  Wood.  Yes;  the  rule  so  states — -short-line  railroads 
or  branch  trains  of  other  railroads. 

The  Witness.  All  trains  carrying  closed-pouch  service 
is  the  way  I  construe  it.     Is  that  correct  ? 

Mr.  Stewart.  That  is  the  language. 

The  Witness,  That  is  the  language.  Out  of  Chicago 
alone,  on  the  Chicago  &  North  Western  Railroad  there  are 
2,272,280  annual  car-miles  in  this  class  of  service,  frequently 
established  to  provide  the  larger  cities  with  more  frequent 
exchanges  of  mail  to  the  important  suburban  post  offices. 
The  statistics,  I  think,  in  Exhibit  5  show  that  we  have 
an  annual  car  mileage  of  3  and  7  foot  units  in  closed-pouch 
space  of  127,000,000,  in  round  numbers,  and  on  the  short 
lines,  still  under  the  weight  basis  of  pay,  there  is  an  annual 
mileage  estimated  of  23,000,000  additional.  On  the  short 
lines  the  service  is  generally  performed  at  every  station  to 
the  extent  of  puttmg  off  and  takmg  on  mail,  but  on  the 
space  basis  lines  there  are  many  examples  of  trains  of  this 
kind  operatmg  over  distances  of  200  or  300  miles,  and  even 
as  high  as  500  and  800,  and  up  to  as  high  as  1,000  or  more — 
closed-pouch  trains.  There  are  many  instances  where  a 
haul  of  great  length  is  involved,  and  the  actual  service 
beyond  the  hauling  of  the  mail  amounts  to  almost  nothing, 
the  exchange  points  being  few,  and  the  amount  of  work 
performed  by  the  baggagemen  negligible,  and  the  expense 
attached  thereto  under  the  railroad  plan  would  be  very  high. 
For  instance,  on  the  Oregon  Short  Line,  train  4  carries  pouch 
mail  between  Portland,  Oreg.,  and  Green  River,  Wyo.,  a 
distance  of  931  miles.  On  that  trip  18  exchanges  of  mail 
are  made,  which  would  cost  the  department,  under  the 
railroad  plan,  S9, 184.45  per  annum  over  and  above  the 
compensation  received  for  the  weight  of  the  mail  hauled. 

Between  Los  Angeles,  Calif.,  and  Del  Rio,  Tex.,  closed- 
pouch  service  of  this  character  is  performed  in  trains  101 
and  102  of  the  Southern  Pacific  Railway.  The  distance 
between  those  points  is  1,263  miles.  Over  this  route  mail 
is  received  at  three  points  and  delivered  at  ten,  each  way, 
that  is,  on  the  round  trip,  which  service  would  cost,  in 
addition  to  the  weight  pay,  $27,659.70  per  annum. 

Question  (by  Mr,  Wood),  Well,  Mr,  McBride,  would  you 
regard  that  service  on  the  Sunset  Limited  as  local  service? 

Answer,  It  is  closed-pouch  service. 


499 

Question.  Would  you  regard  that  as  service  to  local 
stations,  those  three  points  at  which  mail  is  taken  on  and 
10  points  at  which  it-  is  put  off  between  El  Paso  and  Los 
Angeles  on  the  Sunset  Limited — do  you  think  anybody 
would  say  that  that  was  service  performed  at  local  stations  ? 

Answer.  I  am  inclined  to  think  if  this  railroad  plan  went 
through  that  the  railroads  would  insist  that  that  was  the 
sort  of  train  that  should  get  3  cents  a  mile  additional? 

Question.  How  could  they  insist  on  that  when  this  very 
rule  makes  reference  to  service  at  local  stations? 

Answer.  Well,  those  stations  are  local  to  the  line. 
They  are  exchanges  of  mail,  and  the  record  is  taken  by 
the  baggageman. 

Question  (by  Attorney  Examiner  Brown).  It  would 
clearly  come  within  the  rule,  would  it  not  ? 

Answer.  It  would  seem  to  me  so. 

Question  (by  Mr.  Stewart).  The  baggageman  keeps 
the  record  of  those  mails,  does  he,  the  same  as  in  other 
cases  of  closed  pouch  ? 

Question  (by  Mr.  Wood).  Certainly  you  would  not  call 
that  a  local  train  performing  local  service  ? 

Mr.  Stewart.  It  is  local  service. 

^Ir.  Wood.  I  may  be  duU,  but  I  don't  see  it. 

Attorney  Examiner  Brown.  Well,  where  would  you 
draw  the  line,  Mr.  Wood  ? 

Mr.  Wood.  Well,  I  certainly  would  not  say  that  the 
Twentieth  Century  Limited  between  Chicago  and  New 
York  performed  any  local  service  anyv\^here,  although  it 
takes  on  and  puts  off  mail  at  places  between  Chicago 
and  New  York.  I  would  not  say  that  the  Sunset  Limited 
between  New  Orleans  and  Los  Angeles  performed  any 
local  service,  though  it  takes  a  few  passengers  on  en  route, 
and  some  of  them  get  off,  and  it  might  do  the  same  with 
the  mail  bags. 

The  Witness.  They  both  come  under  the  classification 
"closed-pouch  service"  under  the  department's  nomencla- 
ture. We  have  New  York  Central  train  17,  which  oper- 
ates between  New  York  and  Chicago.  Twelve  offices  are 
supplied  by  this  train. 

***** 

The  Witness.  *  *  *  That  supplies  10  offices,  and 
would  cost  the  department,  under  the  railroad  plan, 
S10,500  per  annum,  in  addition  to  the  weight  pay. 

Trains  50  and  51  of  the  New  York  Central,  the  Empire 
State  Express,  operating  between  Buffalo  and  New  York, 
exchange  with  six  stations,  which  would  cost  the  depart- 
ment about  SI, 600  per  annum  in  addition  to  the  weight 
pay. 


500 

Train  4  on  the  New  York  Central,  Chicago  to  Cleveland, 
has  four  exchanges.  This  would  cost  the  department 
approximately  $925  a  station  in  addition  to  the  weight 
pay. 

On  the  Pennsylvania  Railroad,  train  31  exchanges  mail 
between  New  York  and  Indianapolis  with  four  stations, 
which  would  cost  the  department  $8,891  per  annum  in 
addition  to  the  weight  pay. 

Mr.  Wood.  That  is  the  fast  train  from  New  York  to 
St.  Louis,  is  it  not  ? 

The  Witness.  I  think  so;  but  it  is  a  closed-pouch  train. 
It  seems  to  me  it  would  come  clearly  within  this  classifi- 
cation in  the  railroad  plan. 

Between  New  Orleans  and  Chicago,  tram  7  of  the  Illinois 
Central  making  an  exchange  at  Memphis,  I  believe,  carries 
mail  aU  the  way  from  Chicago  to  New  Orleans. 

Mr.  Wood.  Is  that  the  Panama  Limited  ? 

The  Witness.  I  believe  that  is  the  title  of  it. 

Tliis  exchange  is  the  only  exchange  of  mails  carried  from 
Chicago  to  New  Orleans,  and  would  cost  $10,000  per 
annum  above  the  weight  pay.  It  is  designated  as  closed- 
pouch  service  by  the  department. 

The  return  movement  is  a  little  better.  It  handles  mail 
at  Jackson  and  Carbondale,  and  it  would  cost  the  same, 
$10,000  per  annum  in  addition  to  the  weight  pay. 

On  the  Boston  &  Albany  we  have  three  trains  carrying 
closed-pouch  mail  between  Boston  and  Albany.  One  of 
these  trains  exchanges  mail  at  two  stations  between  the 
termini,  one  train  at  but  one  station  and  the  other  at  four 
stations.  This  would  cost  the  department  at  the  rate  of 
$6,570  per  annum  in  addition  to  the  weight  pay. 

On  the  New  York,  New  Haven  &  Hartford,  four  trains 
carry  pouch  mail  between  New  York  City  and  Boston. 
One  of  those  trains  takes  on  mail  at  three  stations,  one  at 
but  one  station,  and  two  of  them  exchange  at  four  stations. 

]Mr.  Wood.  Are  those  the  four  or  five  hour  limited 
trains  ? 

The  Witness.  I  think  two  of  them  are.  I  don't  know 
whether  the  others  are  or  not. 

This  would  cost  the  department  $12,500  additional  to 
the  weight  pay. 

The  Federal  Express,  operating  between  New  York  City 
and  Boston,  puts  off  and  takes  on  mail  at  eight  stations, 
which  would  cost  the  department  $5,000  per  annum. 
***** 

I  also  refer  to  a  train  brought  up  during  the  cross- 
examination   of   one   of   the   carriers'   witnesses,   namely, 


501 

train  20,  operated  over  the  Southern  Pacific  and  the  Union 
Pacific  raih'oads  and  carrying  closed-pouch  mail  from  San 
Francisco   to  North  Platte,   covering  a  distance  of   1,490 

miles. 

***** 

The  Witness.  It  receives  mail  at  14  points  and  delivers 
mail  at  approximately  the  same  number,  generally  the 
same  points  at  which  the  mail  is  received.  The  running 
time  of  this  train  is  about  52  hours  between  those  cities. 
The  cost  to  the  department  on  this  railroad  basis  in  addi- 
tion to  the  pay  for  weight  of  the  mail  carried  would  be 
$44.70  per  day  or  S17,315  per  annum.  This  service  is 
classified  by  tlie  department  as  closed-pouch  service. 

In  none  of  the  trains  mentioned  would  the  work  involved 
in  the  handling  of  the  mail  by  the  baggageman  exceed 
more  than  one  hour  over  the  entire  train  run. 

Question  (by  Mr.  Stewart).  Now,  do  you  know  whether 
the  railroads  in  making  their  estimates  covered  all  that  in 
closed-pouch  service  ? 

Answer.  I  do  not. 

Mr.  Wood.  WeU,  now,  you  say  that  we  failed  to  cover 
aU  that  in  our  estimate  ? 

Mr.  Stewart.  Why,  I  assume  that  you  did,  Mr.  Wood. 
I  think  that  you  covered  all  that  in  your  estimate. 

Mr.  Wood.  He  said  we  did  not. 

The  Witness.  I  said  I  didn't  know  whether  you  did  or 
not. 

Mr.  Wood.  Oh! 

The  Witness.  If  the  counsel  could  inform  me  as  to  the 
amount  they  estimated  as  applying  to  that  class  of  service, 
I  think  I  can  tell. 

Question  (by  Mr.  Stew^\rt).  I  think  the  general  infer- 
ence is  that  they  did  cover  it. 

Answer.  In  all  these  instances  the  mail  is  preceded 
or  followed  by  trains  having  regular  railway  post-office 
service,  and  in  practically  all  trunk-line  trains  the  closed- 
pouch  service  is  established  for  the  purpose  of  giving  more 
frequent  delivery  at  some  important  offices,  or  in  many 
cases,  for  the  purpose  of  rehevmg  the  through  trains  from 
deliveries  from  moving  trains.  The  service  rate,  as 
explained  by  the  railroads'  witness,  is  added  in  order  to 
more  adequately  compensate  the  exclusively  closed-pouch 
trains  and,  as  well,  to  cover  the  additional"  burdens  placed 
upon  the  baggageman  through  the  handling  of  those  mails. 
While  its  appfication  does  serve  to  increase  the  pay  on 
exclusively  closed-pouch  lines,  it  also  serves  the  purpose 
of  greatly  increasing  the  pay  on  trunk  lines  where  the 


502 

closed-pouch  trains  are  frequent,  and  where  they  usually 
operate  over  much  longer  distances  than  they  do  on  the 
short  line.     (R.  3804-3813.) 

EFFECT  OF  3-CENT  RATE  FOR  CLOSED-POUCH  SERVICE 
ON  COMPENSATION  OF  RAILROADS. 

Mr.  McBride  testified  on  direct  examination  as  follows : 

Applied  to  all  services  in  the  closed-pouch  service,  as 
shown  by  Exhibit  No.  5,  127,000,000  miles,  in  round 
numbers,  for  the  year,  and  adding  thereto  the  miles  on 
exclusively  closed-pouch  routes  now  stated  on  a  weight 
basis,  it  is  found  that  this  feature  of  the  proposed  plan 
would  cost  annually,  first  on  routes  now  stated  on  the  space 
basis,  $3,819,000;  on  the  exclusively  closed-pouch  routes 
now  stated  on  the  weight  basis,  it  would  cost  $699,000;  a 
total  of  $4,518,000,  indicating  that  the  short  lines  would 
receive  less  than  $1,000,000  additional  by  the  apphcation 
of  this  rate,  while  the  large  lines  would  receive  more  than 
$3,500,000— nearly  $4,000,000— additional. 

I  have  made  a  little  tabulation  here  showing  the  applica- 
tion of  the  3-cent  rate  to  the  miles  of  service  in  the  closed- 
pouch  service,  shown  in  Exhibit  5,  on  some  of  the  larger 
systems : 

On  the  Atchison,  Topeka  &  Santa  Fe  it  would  add  to 
the  compensation  $131,000  in  addition  to  the  weight  pay. 

On  the  Atlantic  Coast  Line,  $44,000. 

On  the  Baltimore  &  Ohio,  $86,000. 

On  the  Baltimore  &  Ohio  Southwestern,  $36,000. 

On  the  Boston  &  Maine,  $100,000. 

On  the  Central  of  Georgia,  $14,000. 

On  the  Burlington,  $104,000. 

On  the  Chicago  &  Eastern  lUinois,  $19,000. 

On  the  Chicago  &  North  Western,  $107,000. 

Question.  How  about  the  Milwaukee  ? 

Answer.  The  Chicago,  Milwaukee  &  St.  Paul,  $116,000. 

On  the  Rock  Island,  $85,000. 

On  the  Big  Four,  $59,000. 

On  the  Delaware  &  Hudson,  $24,000. 

On  the  Delaware,  Lackawanna  &  Western,  $46,000. 

On  the  Erie,  $65,000. 

On  the  Grand  Rapids  &  Lidiana,  $9,000. 

On  the  Great  Northern,  $55,000. 

On  the  Illinois  Central,  $96,000. 

On  the  International  &  Great  Northern,  $23,000. 

On  the  Louisville  &  Nashville,  $41,000. 

On  the  Missouri  Pacific,  $30,000. 

On  the  New  York  Central,  $169,000. 


503 

On  the  New  York,  NeAv  Haven  &  Hartford,  S133,000. 

On  the  Northern  Pacific,  S43,000. 

On  the  Pennsvlvania  Co.,  $47,000. 

On  the  Pennsvlvania  Kaih-oad  Co.,  $184,000. 

On  the  Phihidelphia  &  Reading,  $60,000. 

On  the  Pittsburgh,  Cincinnati,  Chicago  &  St.  Louis, 
$64,000. 

On  the  Iron  Mountain,  $52,000.  That  is  now  part  of  the 
Missouri  Pacific  Svstem. 

On  the  St.  Louis  &  San  Francisco,  $82,000. 

On  the  Seaboard  Air  Line,  $28,000. 

On  the  Southern  Pacific,  $164,000. 

On  the  Southern  Railwav.  $84,000. 

The  Texas  &  Pacific,  $27,000. 

On  the  Union  Pacific,  $60,000. 

On  the  Wabash  Railway,  $52,000. 

Application  to  a  few  specific  systems : 

The  Chicago,  Burlington  &  Quincy,  between  Chicago  and 
Aurora,  37  miles,  closed-pouch  annual  mileage  413,000; 
annual  increased  pay  on  this  line  from  this  3-cent  rate 
would  be  $12,400  in  addition  to  the  weight  pay.  There 
are  carried  on  this  route  seven  mail  trains  in  and  eight 
mail  trains  out. 

Question  (bv  Mr.  Stewart)  .  How  frequently  ? 

Answer.  That  means  frequency.  That  means  every  day, 
seven  in  and  eight  out. 

Question  (by  Mr.  Wood)  .  How  far  is  it  ? 

Answer.  Thirtv-seven  miles. 

Question.  How  much  mail  would  those  trains  probably 
carrv  ? 

Answer.  The  closed-pouch  trains,  do  you  mean  ? 

Question.  Yes. 

Answer.  I  couldn't  tell  j^ou  without  reference  to  the 
record. 

Question.  Well,  generally  ? 

Answer.  A  very  small  amount  compared  to  the  total 
carried  on  the  route. 

Question.  Two  hundred  pounds  or  one  hundred  pounds  ? 

Answer.  There  might  be  in  some  cases  simply  one  pouch 
of  mail.  In  fact,  a  great  deal  of  the  closed-pouch  service 
comprises  onlv  one  or  two  or  three  pouches  or  sacks. 

Question.  Have  you  any  idea  what  the  average  is  ? 

Answer.  In  closed-pouch  service  ? 

Question.  Yes. 

Answer.  Why,  take  all  of  the  units,  3-foot  units  and 
7-foot  units  together,  we  had  no  way  of  ascertaining  them 
separately  without  a  very  complicated,  long-drawn-out 
taoulation. 


504 

Question  (by  Attorney  Examiner  Browx).  Well,  in 
Aurora,  there  you  have  the  Fox  River  Branch  of  the 
Burlington.  As  I  recollect  it,  there  is  another  carrier  runs 
in  there.     That  is  a  branch-line  service  out  of  Aurora? 

Answer.  Yes,  sir. 

I  should  think  that  the  average  load  in  a  3-foot  unit 
would  not  be  far  over  between  two  and  three  hundred 
pounds,  probably;  a  7-foot  may  be  four,  five,  or  six  hun- 
dred— maybe  more  than  that.  The  7-foot  closed-pouch 
units  usually  are  more  heavil}^  loaded,  of  course,  than  the 
3-foot,  relatively. 

On  the  Chicago  &  North  Western,  between  Chicago  and 
Milwaukee,  the  closed-pouch  mileage  is  705,000.  The 
annual  pay  on  the  3-cent  rate  would  be  $21,000. 

On  the  Galena  Division  of  the  same  road  the  annual 
closed-pouch  mileage  is  684,000,  and  the  annual  pay  on 
the  3-cent  rate  would  be  $20,500. 

On  the  Pennsylvania  Railroad  between  New  York  and 
Philadelphia  the  annual  closed-pouch  mileage  is  1,145,000. 

Question  (by  Attorney  Examiner  Brown).  Where  is 
that? 

Answer.  Between  New  York  and  Philadelphia,  on  the 
Pennsylvania.  The  annual  pay  for  which,  at  the  3-cent 
rate,  would  be  $34,000.  There  are  eight  mail  trains  daily 
each  way. 

On  the  Chicago  &  North  Western,  Wisconsin  Division, 
between  Chicago  and  Madison,  the  annual  closed-pouch 
mileage  is  883,000.  At  3  cents  a  mile  the  total  annual  pay 
would  be  $26,500.  There  are  four  mails  each  way.  (R. 
3814-3818.) 

THREE-CENT  RATE  FOR  CLOSED-POUCH  SERVICE  MUL- 
TIPLIES THE  RATES,  COMPLICATES  THE  SYSTEM, 
AND  SEEMS  TO  BE  UNNECESSARY. 

Mr.  McBride  testified  on  direct  examination  as  follows : 

Question  (by  Attorney  Examiner  Brown).  Now, Mr.  Mc- 
Bride, supposing  that  the  rule  should  be  so  framed  as  to 
eliminate  the  service  on  main  lines  and  apply  to  service  on 
branch  lines  and  short  line  railroads;  what  would  be  your 
objection  to  that? 

Answer.  Well,  of  course,  that  would  remove  some  of  the 
criticisms  I  have  made  here. 

Question:  Well,  I  presume  fundamentally  you  are  op- 
posed to  the  application  of  the  3-cent  charge  for  any 
service  ? 

Answer.  Yes,  sir. 

Question.  Now,  what  is  youi  reason  for  that? 


505 

Answer.  Well,  I  think  it  only  multiplies  the  rates,  com- 
plicates the  system,  and  it  seems  to  me  to  be  unnecessary. 

Question.  Well,  do  the  rates  that  you  have  proposed  for 
the  various  services  include  all  that  ? 

Answer.  It  includes  all  the  services;  yes,  sir.  (R.  3813, 
3814.) 

THREE  CENTS  A  MILE  RATE  FOR  CLOSED-POUCH  SERV- 
ICE AN  UNREASONABLE  ONE. 

Mr.  McBride  testified  on  cross-examination  as  follows : 

Question  (by  Mr.  Wood).  *  *  *  Now,  I  ask  you,  do  you 
think  that  it  Is  unreasonable  in  a  case  of  a  train  like  the 
Panama  Limited,  which  is  one  of  the  horrible  examples 
that  you  have  produced,  for  the  railroad  company  to  say 
that  "thev  ought  to  have  as  much  to  carry  100  pounds  of 
mail  frora  Chicago  to  New  Orleans  on  that  train  as  theyget 
for  carrving  a  passenger? 

Answer.  I  do  think  it  unreasonable,  because  your  mail 
is  carried  in  the  baggage  car.  You  do  not  provide  any  luxu- 
rious passenger  coaches  and  cafe  cars  and  smokere  and  all 
of  that  character  of  service,  all  of  which  comes  within  your 
passenger  rate. 

Question.  The  man  pays  for  that? 

Answer.  He  does  not  pay  anything  for  that,  except  to 
the  Pullman  people.  His  passenger  rate  includes  the  club 
car  and  the  cafe  car  and  all  of  that  additional  service  which 
is  performed,  as  I  understand  it.  There  may  be  an  extra 
rate  on  that  train.     I  don't  know.     (R.  3969.) 

PAY   FOR   DISTRIBUTION   SPACE    NOT   MORE    EASILY   AD- 
JUSTED TO  DISTRIBUTION  NEEDS  AND  WOULD  MULTIPLY 
CAUSES  FOR  DISAGREEMENT. 
THE  RAILROADS'  PROPOSED  PLAN  FOR  THE  AUTHORI- 
ZATION OF  DISTRIBUTION  SPACE  IS  NOT  MORE  EAS- 
ILY  ADJUSTED   TO   DISTRIBUTION   REQUIREMENTS, 
NOR  WOULD  IT  REMOVE  CAUSES  FOR  CONTROVERSY. 

Mr.  Bkauer  testified  on  cross-examination  as  follows: 
Question  (by  Mr.  Wood).  Don't  you  think  that  the 
proposal  which  is  made  by  the  carriers,  which  is  that  the 
department  shall  authorize  simply  the  number  of  feet  of 
distributing  space  and  pay  for  that,  is  more  easily  adjusta- 
ble to  the  distributing  neecls  of  the  department  than  a  rule 
like  your  rule  22  here,  or  anv  other  rule  which  requires 
the  "Post  Office  Department  to  pay  not  simply  for  the 
number  of  distributing  space  wherever  it  is  using  a  railway 
post  office  or  an  apartment  car,  but  to  pay  over  the  full 


506 

leii.cjth  of  tho  run  for  the  storap;e  space  in  that  car  as  well, 
whether  it  uses  it  or  not?  Is  not  that  a  rule  that  is  more 
easily  adjusted  to  the  distrihutino;  re(|uirements  of  the 
service  ? 

Answer.  I  don't  think  so. 

Question.  Now,  if  you  had  just  a  rule,  you  would  also 
entirely  ohviate  all  of  this  controversy  between  the  rail- 
road company  and  the  Post  Office  Department  as  to  the 
conditions  under  which  cars  should  be  operated,  would  you 
not? 

Answer.  I  don't  think  so. 

Question.  Then  you  would  eliminate  all  of  that  contro- 
versy, in  so  far  as  it  related  to  the  operation  of  full  storage 
cars  or  parts  of  storage  cars  I 

***** 

Answer.  I  don't  think  so  at  all. 

Question.  If  the  carriers'  proposals  were  accepted,  and 
the  payment  for  the  distributing  facilities  were  adjusted  so 
as  to  correspond  simply  to  the  distributing  space  required, 
that  is,  to  the  department's  view,  and  then  the  volume  of 
the  mail  carried  was  paid  for  upon  the  basis  of  the  weight 
and  the  space  disregarded  as  a  measurement  of  payment, 
you  would  eliminate  all  of  these  controversies  that  we  have 
been  discussing  this  morning,  about  train  operation  as  con- 
trasted with  tne  needs  of  the  department;  at  least  as  to 
storage  cars  and  parts  of  storage  cars,  would  you  not? 

Answer.  I  don't  know.     I  don't  think  so. 
***** 

We  have  always  had  controversies.  If  you  would 
authorize  a  15,  a  20,  a  25,  a  30,  a  40,  a  50,  or  a  60,  as 
your  plan  contemplates,  I  think  that  would  be  a  good  thing 
under  the  space  basis.  We  have  always  got  to  have  stor- 
age space  in  connection  with  the  distribution  of  the  mail. 
I  can  see  endless  controversy  in  your  plan  here  as  to  what 
we  should  or  should  not  haul  in  a  mail  car.  There  are 
always  controversies,  Mr.  Wood,  as  to  what  should  and 
should  not  come  in  a  mail  car.     (R.  3659-3661.) 

CONTROVERSY  AS  TO  DISCONTINUANCE  AND  REDUC- 
TIONS IN  UNITS  OF  DISTRIBUTING  SPACE  WOULD 
EXIST  UNDER  RAILROAD  PLAN. 

Mr.  Gaines  testified  on  re-direct  examination  as  follows: 

Question  (by  Mr.  Stewart).  Now,  Mr.  Gaines,  if  the  con- 
dition which  Mr.  Wood  has  last  described,  existed,  where  pay- 
ment was  made  for  the  distribiition  unit  on  one  basis,  and 
payment  made  on  another  basis  for  weight,  it  would  leave 
exactly  the  same  source  of  controversy  which  has  always 
existed  under  the  old  weight  basis,  would  it  not? 


507 

Answer.  It  would. 

Question.  That  is,  there  never  would  be  any  ground  for 
any  greater  agreement  as  to  what  distribution  space  should 
be  authorized  ? 

Mr.  Wood.  I  do  not  see  how  the  witness  can  say  that 
when  it  is  left  in  your  hands. 

Mr.  Stewart.  There  would  always  be  the  same  source  of 
disagreement  as  to  whether  the  distribution  space  required 
to  handle  the  mails  should  be  greater  or  less,  whether  the 
weight  element  should  be  encroached  upon  or  relieved. 

Question  (by  Mr.  Stewart).  In  other  words,  the  same 
controversies  with  reference  to  the  discontinuance  and 
reductions  of  the  units  of  distribution  space  would  exist 
under  that  system  just  as  they  did  under  the  old  system, 
would  they  not  ? 

Answer.  Well,  I  think,  with  the  possible  exception  that 
we  would  pay  them  more  for  a  large  imit  than  for  a  small 
unit.  The  same  controversies  in  regard  to  the  amount  of 
space  that  we  were  paying  for  that  existed  under  the  weight 
basis,  as  for  instance,  between  the  40-foot  authorization 
and  the  60-foot  authorization,  would  obtain. 

Question.  The  same  thing  ? 

Answer.  The  same  thing  as  between  any  unit  that  we 
paid  for  under  the  weight  basis.     *     *     * 

Question.  Mr.  Gaines,  wherever  there  was  a  necessity  to 
reduce  the  unit  of  distribution  space  under  the  system 
suggested  by  Mr.  Wood,  there  would  be  the  same  difficulty 
as  existed  under  the  old  weight  basis,  where  part  of  the  pay 
was  on  the  basis  of  weight  and  part  upon  distribution 
space,  would  it  not  ? 

Answer.  I  think  so.  There  would  be  no  reason  for  doubt- 
ing that.     (R.  3367,  3368.) 

UNDER  RAILROAD  PLAN,  EIGHT  DIFFERENT  SIZES  OF 
DISTRIBUTION  SPACE  UNITS  PROVIDED  FOR  WOULD 
INCREASE  OPPORTUNITIES  FOR  DISAGREEMENT 
BETWEEN  RAILROADS  AND  DEPARTMENT. 

Mr.  McBride  testified  on  direct  examination  as  follows: 
The  Witness.  The  feature  of  increasing  the  number  of 
distributing  units  from  3  to  8,  it  seems  to  me,  is  subject  to 
objection.  The  3-unit  plan  was  that  feature  of  the  space 
basis  plan  which  was  most  earnestly  advocated  by  nearly 
everyone  concerned  in  its  framing.  It  was  particiilarly 
emphasized  by  the  members  of  the  Bourne  commission, 
and  they  believed  that  it  would  result  in  reducing  the 
opportunities  for  controversy  between  the  department  and 
the  railroads.  The  provisions  covering  this  feature  of  the 
law  were  discussed  from  every  possible  angle,  and  the  com- 
mission reached   the  conclusion   that  by   decreasing  the 


508 

kinds  of  cars  that  could  be  authorized,  you  would  decrease 
the  causes  for  controversy.  Now,  the  railroads'  plan  pro- 
poses to  increase  the  number  of  those  units  from  3  to  8, 
which  I  think  would  have  the  inevitable  result  of  multiply- 
ing materially  the  causes  of  disagreement. 

Question  (by  Mr.  Wood).  Now,  Mr.  McBride,  you 
reached  those  conclusions  without  hearing  about  this  limi- 
tation and  construction  that  we  have  made.  This  does  not 
contemplate  authorizations  of  sizes  of  cars.  It  simply  con- 
templates authorizations  of  linear  feet  of  distributing 
space. 

Answer.  Different  sizes. 

Question.  According  to  what  the  department  wants.  It 
leaves  it  up  to  them  entirely.  We  have  nothing  to  say 
about  that. 

Answer.  That  is  what  the  old  law  did.  It  provided  for 
the  authorization  of  full  cars  of  certain  sizes,  but  our  dis- 
cretion as  to  what  size  we  needed  did  not  always  coincide 
with  what  the  railroads  thought  we  needed.  *  *  *  (R. 
3769,  3770.) 

PAY  FOR  DISTRIBUTING  FACILITIES  WOULD  MULTIPLY 
CAUSES  FOR  DISAGREEMENT. 

Mr.  McBride  testified  on  cross-examination  as  follows : 

Question  (by  Mr.  Wood)  .  The  same  thing  is  true  with 
respect  to  pay  for  the  distributing  facilities  ?  That  is  per- 
fectly practical  and  easy  of  administration,  whether  it  is 
right  or  wrong? 

Answer.  No ;  I  cannot  agree  with  you  there.  Of  course, 
it  is  practicable,  but  it  would  lead,  as  I  said  on  direct 
examination,  to  multiplying  the  causes  for  disagreernent. 
There  would  stUl  be  objection  to  the  count  and  distribut- 
ing space  that  we  consider  necessary. 

Question.  Well,  we  do  not  have  anything  to  say  about 
that.     We  leave  that  to  you. 

Answer.  Well,  the  railroads  have  had  something  to  say 
about  those  things  in  the  past.     (R.  3980.) 

THE  RAILROADS'  BASIS  FOR  PAY  FOR  DISTRIBUTION 
SPACE. 
RATE  FOR  DISTRIBUTION  SPACE  IN  60-FOOT  RAILWAY 
POST-OFFICE    CARS    BASED    ON   PASSENGER-TRAIN 
CAR-MILE    REVENUE    (AND    PLUS    AN    ADDITIONAL 
PER  CENT). 

Mr.  WoRTHiNGTON  testified  on  direct  examination  as 
follows : 

Question  (by  Attorney-Examiner  Brown).  Let  me  ask 
there,  before  he  passes  that:  I  think  I  understand  how 


509 

jou  reached  your  unit  costs  in  the  space  in  the  car,  but 
how  did  you  reach  your  unit  costs  per  mile  ? 

*  *  *  *  * 

Answer.  Referring  back  now  to  Mr.  Wettling's  exhibit: 
We  felt  that  in  fixing  a  rate  for  railwaj'-mail  pay — take 
the  space  rate,  for  example — it  was  quite  essential  that  the 
rate  to  be  fixed  would  be  based  upon  something  that  could  be 
determined  from  time  to  time  without  again  going  throuo^h 
this  exhaustive  test  and  estimate  of  expenses  per  car-mile 
and  so  forth,  which  has  already  taken  two  years  to  finally 
compile  in  this  case.  Our  rate  as  to  the  space  is  based  on 
the  earnings  per  passenger-train  car-mile.  *  *  * 
***** 

Question  (by  Mr.  Wood)  .  The  rate  that  is  proposed  here, 
as  you  have  said,  if  applied  to  a  full  60  feet  of  space,  would 
be  about  30.5  cents  per  car-mile,  while  the  average  earn- 
ings from  passenger- train  car  traffic  for  1917  are  29.29 
cents.  What  is  the  source  of  the  additional  over  and 
above  29.29  ? 

Answer.  The  rate  of  29.29  cents  revenue  per  passenger- 
train  car-mile  represents  the  average  passenger- train  car- 
mile  earnings  for  all  classes  of  traffic,  including  all  operated 
space  on  trains,  whether  used  or  not.  We  thought  the 
same  factor  should  be  used  with  respect  to  the  rate  for  the 
distributing  space.  The  railroad  exhibits  already  pre- 
sented indicate  that  in  the  railway  post-office  car  service, 
4.2  per  cent  addition  should  be  made  to  the  authorized 
space  to  cover  the  excess  over  the  authorizations.  Apply- 
ing that  percentage  of  addition  to  the  29.29  cents  produces 
a  rate  of  30.5  cents,  which  we  have  used  for  the  full  railway 
post-office  car  unit,  and  in  fixing  the  rates  for  the  60-foo 
car  for  distributmg  facifities  for  25,  30,  and  35  to  37  feet^^ 
*     *     *     (R.  1489-1492.) 

***** 

Mr.  WoRTHiNGTON  testified  on  cross-examination  as 
follows : 

Question  (by  Mr.  Stewart)  .  Are  these  rates  fixed  upon 
the  basis  of  what  we  have  discussed  as  authorized  service, 
or  upon  that  basis,  plus,  say,  31  per  cent  to  cover  additional 
operation  ? 

Answer.  No;  as  I  explained  yesterday,  Mr.  Stewart,  the 
rate  for  the  60-foot  unit,  for  the  full  car,  was  based  upon 
the  revenues  per  passenger- train  car-mile  for  1917,  plus 
the  4  per  cent  addition  for  the  excess  over  authorized 
service  in  that  case,  which  was  a  very  small  percentage. 
The  rates  for  the  apartment  cars  were  obtained  m  the  same 
manner,  and  adding  the  excess  of  the  apartment  service, 


510 

which  1  think  was  4.3  ])cr  cent.  So,  while  the  .31  per  cent 
was  taken  up  in  a  way,  it  was  not  taken  up  as  you  described. 
Only  4  per  cent  was  added  to  the  rate  for  the  full  car,  and 
43  per  cent  was  added  to  the  apartment-car  rates  to  ac- 
count for  the  unauthorized  service. 

Question.  But  it  is  based  upon  passenger  car-mile 
revenue  ? 

Answer.  Yes;  the  measuring  stick  we  used  was  the 
passenger- train  car-mile  revenue  for  the  year  1917,  as  we 
wanted  to  get  some  unit  which  might  be  available  from 
time  to  time  to  be  used  in  readjusting  it. 

Question.  That  is,  it  is  proposed  by  these  rates  to  require 
the  department  to  pay  to  the  railroads  the  same  rate  or 
revenue  for  the  mails  as  they  receive  for  carrying  passengers  ? 

Answer.  Well,  it  is  not  quite  as  much  as  the  revenue 
for  carrying  passengers.  It  is  based  on  the  revenue  per 
passenger-tram  car-mile,  which  includes  the  passengers, 
the  express,  and  is  reduced  by  the  mail.  The  revenues 
from  passengers  proper  would  be,  according  to  my  cal- 
culations, 31.1  cents,  in  place  of  29.3  cents,  which  we 
used.     (R.  1665,  1666.) 

***** 

Question  (by  Mr.  Stewart).  Mr.  Worthington,  referring 
again  to  the  question  of  authorizing  this  space,  we  do  not 
seem  to  agree  upon  what  you  intend  to  say  would  be  the 
rule.  You  said,  I  believe,  that  the  department  would  be 
expected  to  authorize  the  space  which  would  be  neces- 
sarily operated,  but  that  leaves  in  controversy,  does  it 
not,  all  of  this  space  that  we  have  been  talking  about? 
i  Answer.  I  do  not  think  any  space  could  be  left  in  con- 
troversy, and  I  hope  it  will  not  be.  Our  plan  proposed 
was  to  afford  some  protection  against  any  injustice  by  the 
apphcation  of  the  rule  of  adjusting  space  at  some  point 
wnere  it  was  physically  impossible  for  the  railroad  to 
change  a  car.     That  is  what  was  contemplated. 

Q.  You  would  think,  then,  that  that  would  be  the 
governing  consideration,  where  it  was  physically  impos- 
sible to  change  the  consist  of  the  train? 

Answer.  That  was  all,  Mr.  Stewart.     (R.  1687.) 

RATE  FOR  DISTRIBTTTION  SPACE  IN  APARTMENT  CARS 
BASED  ON  PASSENGER  CAR-MILE  REVENTJE  (AND 
PLUS  AN  ADDITIONAL  PER  CENT). 

Mr.  Worthington  testified  on  direct  examination,  as 
follows : 

In  fixing  a  rate  for  these  apartment-car  units  we  adopted 
the  same  plan  as  we  did  in  fixing  the  space  rate  for  the 
unit  in  the  full  cars,  but  took  into  consideration  the  greater 


511 

amount  of  excess  over  authorized  space  in  those  cars.  The 
excess  over  authorized  space  as  of  April,  1917,  was,  as  I 
recall,  about  40  per  cent.  Therefore,  the  basing  passenger 
train-mile  revenue  rate  of  29.29  cents  was  increased  by 
that  percentage,  which  became  the  final  measure  of  the 
pay  for  the  space  in  the  apartment  cars. 

*  *  *  This  produces,  for  the  30-foot. apartment  car, 
which  contains  17  feet  of  distributing  facilities,  a  rate  of 
10.7  cents  per  car-mile,  which  is  a  little  more,  equated  to 
a  60-foot  basis,  than  the  rate  for  th*e  full-car  unit.  *  *  * 
(R.  1496.) 

HIGHER  RATE  FOR  70-FOOT  CARS  NOT  JUSTIFIED,  AS 
THEY  FURNISH  NO  MORE  FACILITIES  THAN  STAND- 
ARD 60-rOOT  CARS. 

Mr.  McBride  testified  on  direct  examination  as  follows: 

With  respect  to  the  additional  rate  for  70-foot  cars, 
which  Mr.  Worthington  stated  that  he  thought  was  neces- 
sary, on  account  of  additional  distributing  space  in  such 
cars,  I  am  informed  that  the  greater  part  of  these  cars  are 
upon  the  Pennsylvania  Railroad,  and,  as  a  matter  of  fact, 
those  70-foot  postal  cars  do  not  furnish,  as  a  whole,  any 
greater  distributing  facilities  than  the  standard  60-foot 
mail  car  of  the  present  day. 

Question  (by  Mr.  Stewart).  I  understand  you  to  say 
that  the  distributing  facilities  in  the  70-foot  car  are  prac- 
tically the  same  as  in  the  60-foot  car. 

Answer.  Perhaps  I  had  better  read  the  comparative 
figures. 

Question.  I  wish  you  would. 

Answer.  The  Pennsylvania  70-foot  cars  furnish  practically 
the  same  number  of  separations  as  provided  (R.  reported, 
sic.)  by  the  standard  60-foot  cars;  in  pigeonholes  for  letters, 
the  Pennsylvania  cars  furnish  748  separations  as  against  696 
in  standard  60-foot  cars,  or  52  additional;  but  the  facilities 
for  distributinoj  packages  and  papers  furnish,  as  clerks  are 
obliged  to  work  in  the  cars,  227  separations  as  against  234 
furnished  by  the  standard  60-foot  cars,  or  7  less  paper 
separations.  The  additional  letter  separations  furnished 
in  Pennsylvania  cars  represent  approximately  1  foot  of 
wall  space  on  each  side  of  the  car,  and  the  additional  sepa- 
rations for  papers  furnished  in  the  standard  60-foot  cars 
represent  substantially  the  same  measurement.  They  are 
approximately  alike.  The  construction  of  the  racks  and 
letter  cases  in  the  standard  60-foot  car  is  such  as  to  save 
room.     As  I  understand  it,   the  method  of  constructing 


512 

racks  in  the  70-foot  car  is  such  that  several  inches  is  taken 
up  with  a  portion  of  the  rack  between  each  section,  the 
rack  being  in  sections,  and  in  that  way  we  lose  a  great 
part  of  that  additional  space.  So.  far  as  storage  space  in 
rennsylvania  70-foot  cars  is  concerned,  these  cars,  although 
10  feet  longer  than  the  standard  60-foot  car,  furnish  about 
5  feet  6  inches  greater  storage  space  than  the  standard 
60-foot  car.  Whenever  this  additional  space  is  used  now, 
under  the  space  basis,  the  department  allows  the  Pennsyl- 
vania Railroad  Co.  a  7-fbot  storage  unit  for  the  use  of  such 
space,  thus  increasing  the  earning  capacity  of  the  car  to 
that  extent. 

It  seems  to  me  that  the  suggestion  that  a  higher  rate  be 
fixed  for  those  cars  is  without  any  merit  on  those  facts. 
(R.  3778-3780.) 

THE  DEPARTMENT  MUST  PAY  FOR  THE  DISTRIBUTING 
SPACE  AS  CONSTRUCTED  BY  THE  RAILROADS  AND 
REPRESENTED  IN  THE  CARS. 

Mr.  WoRTHiNGTON  testified  on  direct  examination  as 
follows : 

Question  (by  Attorney  Examiner  Brown).  That  is  to 
say,  there  is  no  discretion  about  this  thing.  There  are  cars 
that  have  8  feet  of  distributing  facilities,  there  are  cars 
that  have  14,  11,  25,  30,  and  37,  so  when  you  meet  one  of 
those  cars,  why,  there  is  the  charge  to  attach  to  it;  it  is 
not  left  to  the  Post  Office  Department  to  say  that  there  is 
8  feet  of  distributing  space  in  this  car,  or  for  you  to  say 
that  there  is  20,  and  there  leaving   a  field  for  dispute. 

Answer.  Yes,  sir.  This  scale  of  distributing  facilities  was 
prepared  by  the  operating  committee  of  practical  mail 
traffic  managers,  and  represents  the  actual  feet  of  dis- 
tributing facilities  now  contained  in  these  various  units. 

Question  (by  Mr.  Wood)  .  And  the  pay  proposed  is  the 
pay  for  the  feet  occupied  by  those  distributing  facilities 
only? 

Answer.  Yes,  sir,  for  those  facilities  only.  Any  weight 
in  those  cars  which  would  naturally  be  carried  in  the  re- 
mainder of  the  car,  which  does  not  contain  these  facilities, 
would  come  under  the  weight  basis  of  pay.  The  space 
basis  would  apply  to  the  part  of  the  car  which  contains  the 
distributing  facilities. 

Question.  So  it  makes  no  difference  whether  the  length 
of  the  apartment  is  30  feet  or  what  the  length  of  the  apart- 
ment is,  the  pay  which  we  propose  is  for  the  number  of 
feet  of  distributing  space  fitted  out  in  that  car  as  a  sta- 
tionary structure  ? 

Answer.  Yes,  sir.     (R.  1494,  1495.)  . 


513 

THE  RAILROADS'  PROPOSITION  THAT  THE  DEPARTMENT 
SHALL  PAY  F(^R  THE  MAXIMUM  AITIIORIZATION  OF 
DISTRIBUTION  SPACE  l^ETWEEN  POINTS  BETWEEN 
WHICH  ANY  DISTRIBUTION  SPACE  IS  USED. 

THE  RAILROADS'  PROPOSAL  THAT  DEPARTMENT  SHALL 
PAY  FOR  THE  AUTHORIZED  SPACE  TO  THE  END  OF 
THE  CAR  RUN. 

Mr.  WoKTHiNGTox  testiiied  on  cross-examination  as  fol- 
lows : 

Question  (by  Mr.  Stewart).  Just  beloAv  vour  schedule 
there  vou  have  space  for  distributing  facilities,  according 
to  therate  scale  prescribed,  shall  be  paid  for  over  the  neces- 
sary operating  run  of  the  car,  computed  on  a  round-trip 
basis.  Under  that  provision,  I  assume  that  you  would 
applv  these  rates  not  only  to  the  authorized  mileage,  as 
we  have  been  discussing  it  here,  but  to  the  additional  space, 
which,  we  might  say,  is  roughly  approximated  by  31  per 
cent  more. 

Question.  I  am  speaking  of  what  is  meant  by  this  term 
"necessary  operating  run." 

Answer.  Well,  my  understanding  of  that  is  this:  that 
if  a  car  starts  out  with  an  authorization,  say,  of  30  feet, 
and  it  is  reduced,  say,  to  15  feet,  before  it  comes  to  the 
end  of  its  necessary  operating  run,  it  would  seem  proper 
that  the  rate  should  extend  to  the  end  of  the  necessary 
operating  run,  as  it  would  be  a  physical  impossibility  in 
that  case  to  change  the  car.      (R.  1666,  1667.) 

PAY  FOR  THE  MAXIMUM  NUMBER  OF  LINEAR  FEET  OF 
DISTRIBUTING  SPACE  AS  FAR  AS  ANY  DISTRIBU- 
TION SPACE  IS  NEEDED. 

The  following  statement  for  the  railroads  was  made: 
Attorney  Examiner  Browx.  Well  now,  I  don't  see  any 
difference  between  your  proposition,  so  far  as  the  60-foot 
distributing  car  is  concernen,  and  that  offered  by  the  car- 
rier. As  Ainderstand  it,  the  only  difference  is,  of  course, 
in  the  amount  that  is  carried  in  the  storage  car  over  and 
above  the  vacant  space,  the  occupied  space  to  be  paid  for 
at  the  rate;  but  the  discretion  as  to  whether  it  should  be 
a  15-foot  distributing  car  or  a  30-foot  or  60-f()Ot  would  still 
rest  with  the  Department  under  your  plan,  would  it  not, 
Mr.  Wood  ? 

122698—19 33 


.>14 

Mr.  Wool).  I'lulor  our  ijlaii  the  depurtmeut  would  de- 
tormino  tlio  numbtM*  of  linoar  feci  of  dislribiUiug  space  that 
tlioy  require,  and  tlien  our  phin  proj)OHes  that  they  shall  pay 
for  that  full  number  of  feet  over  the  whole  run  of  the  car. 

Attorney  Examiner  Brown.  Over  the  whole  run  of  the 
car? 

Mr.  Wood.  Absolutely. 

Attorney  Examiner  Bkown.  Whether  tliey  used  it  under 
a  different  authorization  beyond  ? 

Mr.  Wood.  Whether  they  use  it  under  a  different  authori- 
zation beyond  or  not. 

Attorney  Examiner  Bkowx.  I  did  not  so  understand  the 
rule. 

Mr.  Wood.  When  Mr.  Worthington  was  on  the  stand  and 
was  asked  about  that,  whether  that  might  not  result  in 
refiuiring  the  Post  OiUce  ne])artment  to  ])ay  for  the  run- 
ning of  the  linear  feet  in  that  car  beyond  the  ])oint  where 
they  used  an\'  distributing  facilities  at  all,  he  said  that  that 
was  not  the  intention;  and  so  we  shall  ])ropose.  and  this  is 
as  good  a  time  to  proi)Ose  it  as  any,  that  that  rule  be  quali- 
lieil  by  saying  that  the  de])artment  shaU,  at  its  discretion, 
determine  the  linear  feet  of  distributing  space  re(|uired 
in  any  given  car,  then  they  shall  ])ay  for  the  maximum 
distributing  space  required  in  that  given  car  between  the 
})oints  between  which  they  use  any  distribution  at  all.  If 
the>'  get  to  the  ])oint  where  they  can  eliminate  all  distribu- 
tion, and  we  see  fit  and  are  required  as  a  matter  of  oper- 
ating necessity  to  carry  that  car  on,  we  would  get  no  pay 
for  the  linear  feet  of  distributing  space  in  that  car  from 
that  ])oint,  but  only  for  the  weight  in  it;  but  if  on  a  run 
such  as  this  run  from  Lincoln  to  JBillings  that  we  have  been 
discussing  the  Post  Office  l)e]:>artment  needs  the  number 
of  feet  of  distributing  space  which,  I  tliiiik,  is  37,  in  a  car 
from  Lincoln  as  far  as  Alliance,  and  then  they  need  only  17 
or  something  like  that  from  iVlliance  on,  that  we  should  be 
paid  for  that  37  feet  through,  because  of  the  utter  impossi- 
bility and  im])racticabilit3'  either  of  making  a  change  of 
the  car  or  of  devising  any  rule  which  we  think  would  be 
definite  and  certain.  On  the  other  hand,  if  at  ^Uliance 
they  were  able  to  shut  off  distribution  entirely,  and  for  the 
sanie  operating  reasons  we  carried  the  car  with  the  storage 
mail  in  it  through  into  Billings,  then  we  would  not  expect 
them  to  ])ay  for  the  distributing  sj)ace  beyond  that  point. 
In  other  words,  what  we  are  trying  to  do,  Mr.  Examiner,  is 
o  suggest  a  set  of  rules  here  whicli  cannot  be  open  to  any 
o  n  troversv.     (K-  3540-3542.) 


515 

THE  RAILROADS'  PROPOSAL  FOR  WEIGHINGS  SUBJECT  TO 
THE  OBJECTIONS  TO  THE  OLD  SYSTEM  AND  TO  THE  ADDI- 
TIONAL OBJECTIONS  AGAINST  WEIGHING  BY  RAILROAD 
EMPLOYEES. 

THE  METHOD  OF  WEIGHING  AND  TABULATION  UNDER 
WEIGHT  BASIS  DESCRIBED.  THE  METHOD  NECES- 
SARILY EMPLOYED  IN  A  WEIGHING. 

Mr.  McBride  testified  on  direct  examination  as  follows: 

Previous  to  the  weighing  the  officers  in  the  field — by 
that  I  mean  the  officers  of  the  Railway  Mail  Service  in  the 
section  to  be  weighed — make  report  on  blanks  prepared  for 
that  purpose  of  all  trains  carrying  mails  on  each  route  to 
be  weighed,  and  prepare  an  outhne  or  scheme  of  weighing 
for  ea'di  route,  showing  all  the  trains  on  that  route  which 
carry  mails,  listing  those  mails,  and  indicating  the  points 
between  which  they  are  carried,  their  frequency,  and  in- 
dicating on  this  same  form  their  recommendation  as  to  the 
manner  in  which  these  weights  shall  be  secured,  whether 
by  train  weigher,  by  station  weigher,  or  by  postmaster. 

The  weights  on  some  trains — usually  those  trains  are  the 
ones  carr3'ing  railway  ]iostal  cars,  or  occasionally  a  closed 
pouch  train  where  exchanges  are  frequent — are  taken  care 
of  by  weighers  assigned  to  the  trains.  The  mails  carried  on 
some  others — usually  the  smaller  railway  post  office  trains- 
are  arranged  to  be  weighed  by  the  railway  ])Ostal  clerks, 
where  it  can  be  done  without  serious  derangement  of  the 
work  in  the  car.  On  other  trains,  which  usually  are  the 
smaller  closed-pouch  trains,  with  few  exchanges,  and  gen- 
erally on  the  routes  having  closed-pouch  service  only,  the 
weights  are  reported  either  by  weighers  located  at  the 
stations  or  by  postmasters.  Our  jiolicy  as  regards  weighers 
at  stations  was  to  assign  them  to  stations  which  are  of 
considerable  importance  and  handle  a  great  many  different 
ti-ains  a  day.  We  did  this  partly  to  secure  the  weights  on 
express  trains,  closed-])ouch  trains,  and  partly  to  su])ple- 
ment  the  work  of  the  weighers  on  the  trains  by  enabling 
weights  to  be  taken  outside  of  the  car  where  a  large  quan- 
tity was  to  go  in  the  train,  and  where  it  would  interfere 
with  and  delay  the  work  in  that  car.  Weight  cards  and 
scales  have  been  furnished  in  the  past  by  the  railroad  com- 
panies, and  *  *  *  weighing  blanks  are  furnished  by  the 
department. 

Question  (by  Mr.  Stewart).  Mr.  McBride,  did  you  not 
omit  one  important  ])rcliminary  to  the  steps  you  have 
mentioned ;  that  is,  the  riding  of  the  lines  by  service  men 
to  ascertain  whether  or  not  the  mails  are  in  normal  con- 
dition over  them? 


51C 

Answer.  That  is  true.  For  some  time  ])reAi()iis  to  the 
ooimneiK'ing  of  the  weighing,  a  very  careful  survey  is  made 
of  the  situation  on  all  the  trains,  and  an  effort  made  to 
correct  any  wrong  conditions  that  may  occur  in  the  service; 
that  is,  eliminating  unnecessary  dispatches  of  mail  or 
things  of  that  sort. 

Question.  Well,  to  ascertain  also  whether  or  not  the 
mails  that  are  being  transjiorted  are  flowing  in  the  usual 
course  of  business,  or  whether  there  is  any  extraordinary 
condition  which  might  i^equire  investigation  to  determine 
whether  those  weights  are  fair. 

Answer.  I  think  those  matters  would  come  within  the 
scope  of  this  })reliminary  investigation  and  survey. 

The  weights  taken  by  train  weighers  are  reported  upon 
cards  similar  to  the  sam])le  which  I  have  ])re])ared,  and 
which  I  shall  be  glad  to  submit.  *  *  * 

You  will  note  that  this  card  is  arranged  to  cover  the 
train  run.  There  is  a  similar  card  for  the  return  move- 
ment, in  which  the  stations  are  arranged  in  reverse  order. 
This  card  represents  the  weight  carried  on  the  Washington- 
Harrisonburg  railw^ay  post-office  train  21 ,  and  are  exact  copies 
of  the  actual  train  cards  used  during  the  statistical  weighing 
of  April,  1917,  except,  as  I  stated,  it  is  the  consolidation  of 
all  the  weights,  instead  of  an  individual  daily  weight  card. 

As  will  be  noted,  these  cards  provide  for  the  entry  of 
weights  taken  on  and  put  off  at  each  station  of  the  route, 
the  mail  being  weighed  at  each  station  by  the  train  weigher 
before  they  are  put  out  of  the  car  or  after  they  are  received 
into  the  car.  At  stations  where  a  station  weigher  is  located 
it  is  customary  for  him  to  weigh  the  mails  received  and  dis- 
patched from  this  train,  and  he  informs  the  train  weigher 
by  memorandum  slip  of  the  amounts  of  such  weights.  It 
is  sometimes  necessary  for  him  to  telegraph  that  informa- 
tion, where  he  has  a  considerable  amount  of  mail  to  weigh' 
and  the  train  departs  before  he  completes  that  duty.  The 
train  weigher  enters  upon  his  weight  card  the  weights  taken 
as  described,  and  when  the  end  of  the  run  is  reached,  and 
all  weights  accounted  for,  the  total  of  the  "taken-on" 
weights  should  approximately  equal  the  total  of  the  "put- 
off"  weights.  The  weighers,  however,  do  not  undertake  to 
exactly  balance  these  cards,  although  every  effort  is  made 
by  them  to  as  nearly  as  possible  secure  an  approximate 
balance;  but  the  exact  balance  is  left  to  be  adjusted  in  the 
office  of  the  division  superintendent  of  Railway  Mail  service 
before  the  cards  are  forwarded  to  the  department  for 
tabulation. 

Question  (by  Mr.  Wood).  Now,  Mr.  McBride,  that  basis 
of  weighing  on  and  weighing  off,  and  the  tabulation  of 


517 

weights  on  and  off,  from  dny  to  da}',  by  trains,  is  absolutely 
necessary,  is  it  not,  to  any  system  of  weighing  in  which  we 
must  obtain  either  an  average  daily  weight  or  the  ton 
miles  ? 

Answer.  It  is.  I  should  qualify  my  answer  by  stating 
it  may  not  be  necessarj'  absolutely  to  obtain  them  in  the 
manner  I  have  described,  but  they  must  be  obtained  from 
some  source. 

Question.  That  is  what  I  mean. 

Ansvrer.  The  weighing  on  the  trains  is  given  personal 
supervision  by  the  postal  clerk  in  charge,  who  is  held  re- 
sponsible for  the  accuracy  of  the  reports.  He  is  required 
to  sign  them  in  company  with  the  train  weigher.  The 
cards,  after  completion  of  the  run,  are  transmitted  to  the 
division  headquarters,  raiU\'a3^  mail  service,  where  they  are 
carefully  scrutinized,  balanced,  and  then  forwarded  to  the 
department. 

In  balancing  the  cards,  if  a  large  discrepancy  is  found, 
effort  is  made  to  locate  and  adjust  the  weights  by  an  in- 
vestigation, so  as  to  decrease  the  amount  of  difference,  if 
possible.  Several  investigations  are  made  in  all  such  cases. 
If  the  discrepancy  is  a  small  one,  and  the  investigations  in 
the  cases  involving  larger  amounts  prove  unsuccessful  in 
locating  the  cause  of  the  difference,  the  cards  are  balanced 
by  dividing  the  amount  of  dift'erence  equally  between  the 
weights  taken  on  at  the  initial  terminal  and  those  put  off 
at  the  end  of  the  run,  subtracting  from  one  and  adding  to 
the  other,  thus  equalizing  the  discrepancy  over  the  entire 
run. 

The  weights  taken  at  the  stations  by  weighei-s  located 
at  such  points,  and  those  taken  by  postmastei-s,  are 
usually  reported  on  weeldy  statement  sheets,  except 
that  in  some  cases  they  do  use  cards,  particularly  the 
station  weighers.  Those  mails  dispatched  are  reported 
on  what  is  known  as  a  "dispatched"  report,  and  those 
received  on  a  "received"  report.  Tliese  reports  take 
the  same  course  as  the  cards,  through  the  division  super- 
intendent, railway  mail  service,  to  the  department. 

When  received  by  the  department,  under  the  plan 
which  has  been  in  vogue  for  a  number  of  yeai-s  past,  of 
performing  the  tabulations  and  consoliilations  in  the 
department  in  Washington,  all  of  the  reports  for  a  par- 
ticular route  are  collected,  assorted  ])y  trains,  l)y  weeks, 
and  are  then  consolidated  l)y  weeks;  so  that  at  the  con- 
clusion of  the  weighing,  the  weights  carried  for  each 
parti<'ular  train  are  represented  by  15  cards,  each  cover- 
ing one  week's  weights  carried  on,  that  train.     These  15 


618 

cards  aro  then  consolidated  into  one  rard,  representing:: 
the  entire  weight  carried  on  the  train  during  the  whole 
of  the  weighing  period.  The  final  cards  for  all  of  the 
trains  of  a  route  are  then  coinl)inod  with  such  weights 
as  may  be  reported  by  station  weighei-s  or  postmasters 
upon  a  large  sheet,  from  which  a  result  is  olitained,  which 
is  transcribed  upon  a  fonu  known  as  llailroad  Weight 
Circular,  samples  of  which  for  the  route  in  c^uestion  I 
submit  herewith.     *     *     * 

The  Witness.  By  reference  to  this  railroad  weight 
circular  it  will  be  noted  that  the  stations  on  the  route  are 
entered  in  column  2,  and  that  the  "outward"  and  "in- 
ward" weights  are  separately  entered,  with  "taken-on" 
and  "put-off  columns  under  each  head. 

This  statement  is  a  consolidation  of  the  weights  carried 
on  this  route  iluring  the  statistical  weighing  of  the  spring 
of  1917,  fro)ii  which  you  will  see  that  there  was  a  total  of 
207,670  pounds  carried  outward  and  137,470  pounds 
carried  inward. 

1  might  state  that  from  this  point  on  the  process  would 
be  the  same,  no  matter  how  the  mails  were  weighed.  That 
is,  the  ascertainTuent  of  the  average  daily  weight  and  the 
ton  miles  would  be  the  same,  no  matter  how  the  mails 
are  weighed. 

The  next  step  is  the  ascertainment  of  the  pound-miles 
and  average  daily  weight  from  the  consolidated  daily 
report,  and  I  will  brielly  describe  the  method  of  such 
ascertainnient. 

Take  the  weight  circular  which  I  have  submitted.  We 
first  insert  at  the  left  of  the  stations  the  distances  between 
them,  column  1.  That  is,  showing  the  distance  from 
Washington  to  Alexandria,  and  Alexandria  to  Spring- 
field. These  distances  are  expressed  in  huudredtfis  of 
miles,  and  are  taken  from  the  distance  circular  furnished 
by  the  company.  This  distance  circular  is  a  sworn  state- 
ment furnished  by  the  companies  for  each  railroad  mail 
route. 

We  fii-st  start  with  the  weight  taken  on  at  Washington 
under  "outward"  trains.  The  totals  of  items  1  and  2, 
in  colunm  4,  138,886  pounds,  is  nmltiplied  by  8.10  miles, 
the  distance  to  the  next  station,  which  in  this  case  is 
Alexandria.     This  result  produces  the  pound-miles. 

If  you  will  refer  to  the  second  part  of  the  exhibit,  you  will 
see  the  exact  process. 

We  then  ascertain  the  difference  between  the  weights 
put  off  and  those  taken  on  at  Alexandria,  which,  in  this  case, 
amounts  to  3,239  pounds,  and  there  having  been  more  mail 


519 

put  on  the  train  than  was  taken  off,  we  add  that  difference 
to  the  138,886  pounds,  producing  142,125  pounds,  wdiich 
we  multiply  by  6.40  miles,  the  distance  to  Springfield,  the 
next  station  where  mails  are  exchanged. 

At  Springfield,  the  same  i)rocess  is  gone  through,  except 
that  in  this  case  the  mails  put  off,  having  exceeded  those 
taken  on,  the  difference  is  subtracted  instead  of  added. 

This  process  is  foUow^ed  with  respect  to  each  station  on 
the  route  until  we  reach  the  last  one,  where,  if  the  weight 
circular  is  correct,  and  all  computations  are  correctly  made, 
the  last  remainder  carried  from  Linville  station  to  Harrison- 
burg, should  be  the  amount  shown  as  put  off  at  Harrison- 
burg on  the  weight  circular.  In  other  words,  the  figures 
prove  themselves  if  correctly  prepared. 

Question  (by  Mr.  Stewart)  .  Now,  Mr.  McBride,  that 
process,  under  a  weighing  system,  which  is  necessary  to 
produce  pound-miles  or  an  average  daily  weight,  will  apply 
to  every  route  in  the  country,  and  the  mails  on  and  off  at 
everv  station  on  every  route  in  the  country  ^ 

Answ^er.  That  is  right.  By  the  foregoing  described  pro- 
cess, w^e  ascertain  the  total  pound-miles  of  mail  carried  on 
outward  trains  during  the  weighing  period.  The  same 
process  is  followed  in  the  case  of  the  inward  trains,  produc- 
ing the  pound-miles  lor  the  inward  trains.  Tlie  pound-miles 
for  the  outward  trains  are  then  combined  with  the  pound- 
miles  for  the  inward  trains,  which  produces  the  pound-miles 
for  all  trains  on  the  route,  and,  of  course,  to  ^et  the  ton- 
miles  on  that  route,  we  would  have  to  first  divide  by  35, 
and  then  multiply  by  365,  and  divide  by  2,000. 

Under  our  old  plan,  of  course,  we  did  not  compute  the 
ton-mileage.  We  computed  the  average  daily  weight, 
which  w^as  ascertained  by  dividing  the  total  pound-miles 
shown  on  this  exhibit  by'^the  total  length  of  route,  146.46 
miles,  and  the  quotient  obtained  by  this  division  again 
divided  by  35  days,  the  number  of  days  in  the  weighing 
period,  produced  an  average  daily  weight  on  the  route  of 
4,527  pounds.    That  is  shown  on  the  last  sheet  of  the  exhibit. 

Question.  That  means  tliat  much  weight  carried  over 
every  mde  of  route,  and  for  which  we  paid  ( 

Answer.  Yes,  sir.  Now,  to  get  the  ton-miles  on  this 
route  it  is,  of  course,  necessary  to  multiply  this  daily  weight 
by  365  and  divide  by  2,000,  which  would  give  the  annual 
ton-miles  on  this  route.      (11 .  3726-3735.) 


5-20 

GENERAL  OBJECTIONS  REVIVAL  OF  DISCREDITED 
METHOD. 

(A)  RESTORATION  OF  WEIGHT  BASIS  WOULD  AGAIN 
BRING  TO  THE  FRONT  ALL  OF  ITS  DEFICIENCIES, 
ITS  LACK  OF  FLEXIBILITY,  AND  THE  INABILITY  TO 
COMPENSATE  FOR  UNUSUAL  CONDITIONS. 

Mr.  McBiiiDE  testiHecl  on  direct  exainiuation  as  follows: 

The  restoration  of  the  weight  basis  would,  in  my 
opinion,  again  ])ring  to  the  front  all  of  the  deficiencies 
that  have  always  inhered  in  such  a  basis,  i.  e.,  its  lack  of 
flexibility,  and  the  difficulties  in  the  way  of  recognizing 
an  unusual  flow  of  mail,  »)r  inability  to  recognize  by  addi- 
tional compensation  when  additional  mails  are  carried 
through  diversions  resulting  from  disturbances  in  the 
even  course  of  the  mails,  such  as  floods,  earthquakes,  and 
so  forth. 

The  files  of  the  department  are  full  of  cases  where  the 
department  has  been  obliged,  under  the  old  weight  basis, 
to  declme  to  recompense  companies,  which,  under  such 
circumstances,  were  compelled  to  transport  large  quanti- 
ties of  mail  not  carried  by  them  during  the  weighing  period. 

A  conspicuous  case  in  pomt  is  that  which  applied  on  the 
Maine  Central,  the  Boston  &  Maine,  and  the  New  York, 
New  Haven  &  Hartford  Railroads  at  the  outbreak  of  the 
war,  when  an  exigency  arose  for  the  handling  of  a  large 
quantity  of  mail  landed  from  the  liner  Kronprincessin 
Oecilie.  at  Bar  Harbor,  Me.,  which  was  carried  to  New 
York.  There  were  7  carloads  of  this  mail  transported, 
requiring  a  s])ecial  train,  and,  under  the  law,  the  Depart- 
ment was — that  is,  the  old  law — without  authority  to 
allow  any  compensation  therefor,  as  those  mails  were  not 
included  in  those  weighed  during  the  weighing  i)eriod. 
Consequently,  the  company  was  compelled  to  appeal  to 
Congress,  which  body  passed  a  law  granting  such  compensa- 
tion m  this  case. 

Question  (by  Mr.  Stewart)  .  The  roads  would  have  been 
specially  compensated  for  that  movement  under  this  space 
])asis  ? 

iinswer.  iVbsolutely.  They  would  have  been  paid  for 
7  cars  over  the  distance  transported,  and  if  they  operated 
the  cars  in  a  return  trip,  they  woidd  have  been  paid  for 
the  return  trij). 

Similar  cases  occurred  during  the  troubles  with  Mexico 
in  1914,  when  practically  no  mails  were  dispatched  to 
that  country  over  the  lines  ordinarily  carrying  those  mails, 
and  which  lines  were  beuig  weighed  in  the  sprhig  of  that 
year.     Consequently,   the  weights  on  some   of  the  lines, 


.Vil 

because  of  not  carrying  such  mails,  showed  a  very  slight 
increase  in  weight  over  1910,  and  some  roads.  I  believe, 
showed  an  actual  decrease.  The  Department  was  here 
again  powerless.  It  could  not  estimate  such  weights, 
nor  could  it  weigh  them  when  the  dispatches  were  resumed, 
as  there  was  no  way  of  determining  how  much  of  the  matter 
was  new  matter. 

Concerned  in  the  same  case  was  the  Florida  East  Coast 
Railway  and  the  Atlantic  Coast  Line  Railway,  on  account 
of  the  dispatch  of  a  considerable  amount  of  Mexican  mail 
and  mail  for  the  United  States  forces  at  Vera  Cruz,  via 
Key  West;  but,  as  in  the  other  cases,  no  pay  could  be 
allowed  under  the  law. 

Question.  As  I  understand  you,  Mr.  McBride,  after  the 
weighing  had  occurred  and  the  pay  had  been  adjusted  for 
four  years,  these  diversions  occurred,  by  which  mail  for 
Mexico  and  Central  America,  which  ordinarily  would  go 
through  St.  Louis  and  south,  were  diverted  over  the  Sea- 
board  

Answer.  The  Atlantic  Coast  Line. 

Question.  The  Atlantic  Coast  Line,  and  over  the  Florida 
East  Coast  to  Key  West,  where  they  were  not  carried 
during  the  weighing  period,  for  which  the  companies 
never  received  any  compensation. 

Answer.  That  is  correct,  according  to  mv  understanding 
of  it. 

Question  (by  Attorney  Examiner  Brown).  Do  you 
discuss  later  on  the  question  of  the  proposition  of  the  rail- 
roads to  have  this  weighing  occur  yearly  instead  of  every 
four  years  ? 

Answer.  Yes,  sir.  Recurring  to  the  instance  that  I 
cited  on  the  Boston  &  Maine,  I  would  like  to  contrast  with 
that  some  actual  instances  of  a  similar  nature  that  have 
occurred  since  the  installation  of  the  space  basis  where  we 
have  actually  paid  for  additional  cars  to  transport  mail 
under  exactly  identical  circumstances. 

On  November  18,  1918,  the  steamer  El  Oriente  arrived 
in  Newport  News,  Va.,  with  1,610  sacks  of  mail.  It 
never  had  landed  there  before.  The  department  loaded 
one  car,  a  complete  car,  to  Cincinnati,  and  another  com- 
plete car  to  Washington,  for  which  the  companies  were 
paid  the  regular  space  rates  (R.  "weights,"  sic). 

On  November  2;i,  1918,  the  steamer  Tom  Maru  landed 
at  Baltimore,  Md.,  an  unusual  occurrence,  one  that  never 
had  occurred  in  the  regular  service  previous  to  the  war. 
On  this  occasion  a  full  car  was  loaded  and  (Usnatched  to 
Harrisburg,  Pa.,  a  car  loaded  and  dispatched  to  New  York, 
another   car   dispatched    to   Washington,    D.   C,    and,   in 


622 

addition,  346  sacks  were  sent  to  New  York  on  New  York 
and  Washington  train  140,  and  an  additional  storage  unit 
authorized  to  take  care  of  it. 

Question  (by  Mr.  Stewart).  If  those  extraordinary- 
situations  had  occurred  under  tlie  weight  basis  system,  the 
department  would  have  the  right  to  demand  the  carrier 
furnish  tlircc  cars  in  the  case  of  the  ship  that  landed  at 
Baltimore,  and  two  cars  in  tlie  case  of  the  ship  that  landed 
at  Newport  News  ? 

Answer.  I  think  so;  yes,  sir. 

Question.  That  was  the  law  ? 

Answer.  Yes,  sir. 

Question.  And  they  had  to  transport  that  for  nothing? 

Answer.  Absolutely. 

Question.  And  you  assume  that  that  would  be  so  under 
any  weight  ])asis  system  that  could  be  devised  ? 

Answer.  The  only  advantage  that  the  railroads'  basis 
would  have  over  the  old  basis,  it  seems  to  me,  is  that  there 
would  be  a  weighing  more  frequently,  and  if  any  such 
conditions  occurred  during  the  weighing  period,  they  would 
be  reflected  in  the  pay  for  that  year. 

Question.  That  is,\you  would  be  paying  for  a  shipload 
of  mail  tlu'ougliout  the  year  '^     *     *     * 

On  December  31,  1918,  the  steamer  Aeohs  arrived  at 
Newport  News,  Va.,  and  it  was  necessar}^  to  dispatch  a 
complete  car  to  Richmond,  Va.  At  that  point  the  car 
was  unloaded,  and  the  mail  was  dispatched  on  various 
trains,  requiring,  in  some  cases,  additional  storage  space 
units. 

On  January  6,  1919,  the  steamer  Pnstores  arrived  at 
Newport  News,  Va.,  with  3,097  sacks  of  mail.  In  this 
case  thi-ee  cars  were  loaded  and  dispatched,  and  paid  for — 
one  car  to  Cincinnati,  Ohio:  one  car  to  Washington,  D.  C; 
and  one  car  to  New  York  City. 

On  February  13,  1919,  the"  same  steamer  again  arrived 
at  Newport  News  with  1,470  sacks.  The  same  cars  were 
again  loaded  and  dispatched — the  same  number  of  cars. 

On  April  19,  1919,  a  collier  arrived  at  Norfolk,  Va.,  with 
mail  by  reason  of  which  it  was  necessary  to  dispatch  two 
loaded  cars,  one  to  Cincinnati,  Ohio,  and  one  to  Columbus. 
Ohio. 

Question.  Now,  Mr.  McBride,  have  you  considered,  in 
that  connection,  that  if  this  ship  had  not  arrived  at  New- 
port News,  but  had  made  its  usual  port,  the  amount  of 
mail  would  a{)pear  in  the  weights  somewhere  ? 

Answer.  I  did  not  intend  to  state  tliat  the  same  con- 
ditions did  not  happen  at  ports  where  tliey  usually  arrived. 


r.23 

In  fact,  the;7  are  coming  there  every  day,  and  additional 
cars  are  assigned  to  carry  it.  This  does  not  he  in  the 
unusuahiess  of  it.  This  is  only  to  show — these  are  sample 
cases  simply  to  show  what  happened  at  ports  where  it 
never  did  happen  under  ordinary  conditions. 

Question  (by  Mi*.  SxEWAitT).  And  under  a  weight  basis, 
unless  tlioso  arrivals  were  during  the  weigliing  period,  the 
railroads  would  not  have  received  pay  for  that  service  ? 

Answer.  No;  and  if  it  had  occurred  during  the  weighing 
period,  as  I  stated  before,  the  weight,  although  there  miglit 
not  be  a  recurrence  of  a  similar  movement  during  the 
remainder  of  the  adjustment  period,  yet  the  pay  for 
that  weight  would  be  reflected  in  the  pay  of  the  railroads 
during  the  whole  term,  and  under  the  railroads'  plan,  it 
would  go  back  to  July  1  previous.      (R.  3714-3720.) 

(B)  TRUE  WEIGHT  NEVER  ASCERTAINED  UNDER  WEIGHT 
BASIS;  UNSCIENTIFIC  AND  WAS  GUESSWORK  TO 
LARGE  EXTENT. 

Mr.  Knox,  on  cross-examination,  testified  as  follows: 

Question  (b}-  Mr.  Wood).  Under  the  weight  basis,  in  so 
far  as  the  payment  comes  from  weight,  then  the  measure  is 
fixed  and  definite  and  does  not  depend  upon  the  judgment 
or  the  personal  characteristics  of  any  individual  in  the  Post 
Office  Department,     Do  you  understand  that  question  ? 

Answer.  I  think  I  do. 

Question.  Well,  can  you  answer  that  ? 

Answer.  I  would  say  it  does  depend,  to  a  great  extent, 
even  then;  yes. 

Question.  Wliat  does  he  do  to  the  scale? 

Answer.  He  doesn't  do  anything  to  the  scales,  but  he 
exercises  his  privilege  and  prerogative,  or  has  to  eliminate 
certain  weights  to  make  fixed  balances,  to  make  arbitrary 
balances. 

Question.  Well,  you  don't  moan  to  say  that  under  the 
weight  basis  the  Post  Office  Department  did  not  pay 
according  to  the  true  weights  as  ascertained,  do  you? 

Answer.  There  never  was  a  true  weight  ascertained, 
Mr.  Wood,  under  the  weight  basis. 

Question.  Wliat? 

Answer.  There  never  was  a  true  weight  ascertained 
under  the  weight  basis.  It  is  absolutely  unscientific. 
It  has  been  guesswork  to  a  large  extent. 

Question.  Why  was  not  the  true  weight  ascertained? 

Answer.  Because  it  was  pliysically  impossible  to  get  a 
true  average  with  the  variety  and  multitude  of  temporary 
men  that  had  to  be  employed  to  get  these  weights. 


524 

Question.  Now,  if  you  take  the  weights,  they  have  to 
balance  on  and  off,  you  get  just  as  close  an  ascertahiment 
of  the  weight  carried  as  you  do  in  weighing  anything  els(^ 

Answer.  I  have  seen  them  hick  some  30,000  to  as  high 
as  100  from  balancing  on  one  particular  run,  yet  we  had 
to  use  those  weiglits  in  paying  the  railroad  company. 
(R.  3103-;U05.) 

(C^  UNCERTAINTY       OF       AVERAGE       DAILY       WEIGHT 
OBTAINED  UNDER  WEIGHT  BASIS. 

Mr.  Knox  testified,  on  re-direct  examination,  as  follows: 

Question  (by  Mr.  Stewart).  Referring  to  your  testimony 
regarding  the  weighing  of  the  mails  under  the  weight  sys- 
tem, is  it  not  true  that  in  addition  to  the  disadvantages 
to  which  you  referred — ^I  will  say  not  disadvantages,  but 
the  uncertainties  to  which  you  refer — under  any  weight 
system  as  it  has  been  administered — it  becomes  necessary 
to  choose  a  period  of  weighing  ? 

Answer.  It  does,  yes;  and  it  always  has  under  any 
weight  system  we  have  had. 

Question.  Because  the  weighing  can  not  continue 
during  the  whole  year,  and  it  must  be  arranged  for  a 
limited  period  ? 

Answer.  It  is  entirely  impracticable,  I  think,  for  the 
weighing  to  continue  during  the  whole  3'ear. 

Question.  And  the  purpose  of  choosing  such  a  period 
as  provided  by  the  statute  under  the  old  system  was  to 
secure  a  period  which  would  produce  a  fair  average  daily 
weight  for  the  entire  period  ? 

Answer.  That  was  the  design  of  it ;  yes,  sir. 

Question.  Now,  is  it  possible  to  always  choose  such  a 
period  which  will  produce  an  exact  average  ? 

Answer.  I  would  not  think  so. 

Question.  So  that  there  would  be  always  that  uncer- 
tainty ? 

Answer.  That  uncertainty  remains  with  the  weight 
basis  always. 

Question.  Even  though  the  executive  officer  might  do 
his  very  best  and  use  his  best  judgment? 

Answer.  Yes,  sir.     (R.  3191,  3192.) 

(D)  MORE    INEQUALITIES    UNDER   WEIGHT-BASIS     SYS- 
TEM THAN  UNDER  SPACE-BASIS  SYSTEM. 

Mr.  Gaines  testified  on  cross-examination  as  follows: 

Question  (by  Mr.  Wood)  .  Now,  when  the  pay  for  the 
volume  of  mail  carried,  as  distinguished  from  the  pay  for  the 
space  and  the  distributing  facilities  solely,  is  under  considera- 


525 

tion,  then,  under  the  weight  basis,  the  railroad  company  per- 
forms that  service  wliich  you  demand,  namely,  the  carriage 
of  that  volume  of  mail  which  you  tender  to  the  raih'oad 
company,  and  it  performs  it  just  in  the  manner  in  which  it 
becomes  necessary  for  it  to  perform  it  in  connection  with 
the  train  operation,  and  all  of  this  dispute  as  to  how  much 
space  they  should  be  paid  for  would  disappear  entirely, 
would  it  not  ? 

Answer.  Mr.  Wood,  the  controversies  might  disappear 
in  some  directions,  but  there  were  more  inequalities  under 
the  weight  basis,  toward  the  end  of  the  weighing  period, 
in  one  day,  than  there  would  be  under  the  space  basis  in  a 
week  or  a  month.     (R.  3297.) 

(E)  OBJECTIONS  TO  ANNUAL  WEIGHING  PLAN  OF  RAIL- 
ROADS. 

Mr.  Knox  testified  on  re-cross  examination  as  follows: 

Question  (by  Mr.  Ashbaugh)  :  Mr.  Exammer,  I  would 
like  to  ask  the  witness  why  the  weight  basis  is  suggested  in 
the  plan  introduced  by  the  carriers  of  weighing  the  mails 
for  35  consecutive  days  beginning  on  the  second  Tuesday 
of  September  each  year,  and  makuig  that  average  the 
basis  for  the  compensation  for  that  fiscal  year — what 
objection  would  you  have  to  that  ? 

Answer.  The  objection  is  that  we  are  paying  the  company 
for  11  months  and  25  days  on  an  estimate  based  upon  35 
days,  when  the  mails  may  fluctuate,  may  vary,  may  in- 
crease, may  diminish.  It  is  an  estimate,  exactly  the  same 
as  the  old  weight  basis,  only  it  is  once  a  year  instead  of  once 
ever}'  four  years. 

Question.  You  think  it  would  be  fairer,  though,  than 
once  in  four  years  weight  prior  to  the  quadrennial  period 
to  which  that  basis  was  applied,  don't  you  ? 

Answer.  It  would  produce  a  closer  average;  yes,  a  fairer 
average. 

Question.  And  it  could  be  averaged  back  to  the  1st  of 
July  as  well  as  extended  to  the  30th  of  the  succeeding  June, 
could  it  not  ? 

Answer.  Entirely  practical  to  average  it  back;  yes,  sir. 

Question.  That  is  all  I  care  to  ask  you.     (R.  3211,  3212.) 

(F)  ANY  WEIGHING  OF  THE  MAILS  SHOULD  BE  DONE  BY 
THE  POST  OFFICE  DEPARTMENT. 

Mr.  Stone  testilied  on  cross-examination  as  follows: 

Question  (by  Mr.  Wood).  Mr.  Stone,  suppose  this  weigh- 
ing was  done  at  the  expense  of  the  railway, in  the  same  way 
in  which  they  weigh  other  things  that  they  carry,  so  that 


526 

thatolimiuatod  from,  the  Post  Ollice  side  of  it  the  expense 
of  weighing.  Then,  wliat  do  you  say  as  to  the  relative  ex- 
pense of  the  administrative  work  in  the  two  systems  of  pay  ? 

xVnswer.  Well,  I  do  not  think  the  railroad  companies 
should  be  permitted  to  weigh  the  United  States  mail. 
I  think  that  is  a  function  of  the  Post  Office  Department. 
The  law  charges  the  department  with  it,  under  the  old 
weight  system. 

Question.  You  do  not  think  the  sworn  weighmastcrs, 
whose  weights  are  accepted  in  all  other  classes  of  trans- 
portation jjusiness,  are  competent  or  are  to  bo  trusted  to 
weigh  the  mail  ? 

iGiswer.  No;  I  do  not  say  that,  but  I  think  the  work 
should  be  done  by  representatives  of  the  department,  if 
it  is  going  to  be  done  at  all.  Besides  that,  the  continual 
..  eighing  of  the  mail — if  that  is  what  your  question  implies — 
rather  hampers  and  interferes  to  some  extent  with  the 
expeditious  handling  of  the  mail.  It  was  a  disadvantage 
under  the  old  weight  system,  during  these  quadrennial 
weighings,  to  stop  and  have  the  mail  weighed  at  every 
staSon.  Under  the  space  system,  that  has  been  entirely 
done  away  with.     (R.  381,382.) 

DIFFICULTIES  OF  SECURING  AND  BALANCING  WEIGHTS 
UNDER  RAILROAD  PLAN. 

(A)  DIFFICULTY  IN  SECURING  WEIGHT  AT  POINTS  WHERE 
NO  RAILROAD  REPRESENTATIVE  LOCATED. 

Mr.  McBride  testified  on  direct  examination  as  follows: 
Another  difficulty  in  connection  with  the  reporting  of 
the  weights  by  the  railroad  employees  arises  from  the  fact 
that  on  many  railway  post-office  trains  a  considerable 
number  of  exchanges  of  mail  are  made  at  stations  where  no 
railroad  employees  are  located,  such  as  at  points  where 
there  is  not  even  a  railroad  station,  the  mails  being  ex- 
changed by  means  of  a  crane,  and  being  carried  to  and  from 
the  post  office  by  an  employee  of  the  department.  The 
railroads  have  not  indicated  how  they  would  have  these 
weights  reported,  but  they  have  no  representative  at  such 
points,  and  I  presume  they  would  expect  the  department 
to  secure  those  weights.     (R.  3739.) 

(B)  DIFFICULTY     IN     SECURING     BALANCED     WEIGHTS 
UNDER  RAILROAD  PLAN  OF  TAKING  WEIGHTS. 

Mr.  McBriue  testified  on  direct  examination  as  follows: 

Answer.  Another    feature    which    your    question    has 

brought  to  my  mind  is  the  question  of  obtaining  balancas 

between  the  '''off"  and  "on'^  weights  under  the  railroads' 

plan. 


527 

Under  the  department's  plan  of  weighing  by  weighers 
located  on  the  trains,  all  of  the  weights  carried  on  a  par- 
ticular train  are  weighed  by  one  person  upon  the  same 
scales,  under  which  condition,  of  course,  it  is  much  easier 
to  secure  a  balance  of  weights  than  under  the  railroad  plan, 
where  the  weights  would  be  taken  by  as  many  persons  as 
there  were  stations  on  the  route  which  exchanged  with  this 
train :  and,  of  course,  there  would  be  quite  as  many  (hfferent 
scales  as  there  were  stations.  I  yery  much  doubt  that, 
under  those  circumstances,  we  would  be  able  to  secure 
anywhere  near  a  balance  without  practically  forcing  eyery 
single  balance.  Eyen  though  we  got  the  result  for  a  train 
by  the  circuitous  process  I  haye  described,  and  got  these 
weights  from  all  oi  these  reports,  I  doubt  yery  much  if  any 
of  them  would  eyer  be  anywhere  near  a  balance,  for  the 
reasons  I  haye  explained.    '(R.  3738,  3739.) 

(C^  UNSATISFACTORY  INVESTIGATIONS  OF  DISCBEP- 
ANCIES  WITH  RAILROAD  EMPLOYEES  OWING  TO 
FREQUENT  CHANGE  OF  PERSONNEL. 

Mr.  McBride  testified  on  direct  examination  as  follows: 

1  might  also  state  in  this  connection  that  our  inyestiga- 
tions  to  endeayor  to  locate  discrepancies  between  weights 
put  off  and  taken  on  at  different  points  haye  not  been  very 
satisfactory  when  conducted  with  the  railroad  companies. 
I  do  not  wish  to  intimate  that  because  there  is  anj-thing 
ulterior  or  wrong  in  their  method  of  handling  it,  but  because 
their  employees  change  so  frequently.  They  do  not  haye 
the  same  man  in  the  same  position  throughout  the  period. 
For  instance,  a  discrepancy  will  occur  to-day,  and  by  the 
time  that  case  comes  around  and  we  are  ready  to  make  our 
investigation,  that  employee  may  be  somewliere  else.  He 
may  not  be  in  that  position.  Consequently,  our  investiga- 
tions, so  I  am  told  by  those  who  have  conducted  those 
investigations,  have  been  very  unsatisfactory.  (R.  3739, 
3740.) 

(B)  NECESSARY  TO  HAVE  WEIGHTS  TABULATED  BY 
TRAINS. 

Mr.  McBride  testified  on  cross-examination  as  follows: 

Question  (bj-  Mr.  Wood).  But  before  we  get  to  that,  so 
far  as  this  question  of  the  reports  is  concerned,  why  would 
it  not  be  entirely  feasible  for  each  station  to  make  you  a 
consolidated  report  of  the  mail  on  and  off  at  that  station, 
accompanied  by  such  detail  as  might  be  required  ?  Now, 
after  all,  when  you  have  got  through  balancmg  the  trains, 
the  purpose  of  it  is^to^balance  the  weight  of  the  route  as  a 
whole,  is  it  not  ? 


528 

Answer.  That  is  one  of  tlu^  purposes. 

Question.  That  is  the  iinal  purpose,  is  it  not? 

Answer.  Of  course,  it  is  necessary  for  us  to  have  the  weight 
by  trains,  because,  after  the  weighing  is  completed,  we 
ascertain  the  value  of  each  train  in  order  to  get  a  basis  for 
making  deductions. 

Question.  Fines,  you  mean  ? 

Answer.  No;  not  fines.  De(hictions  for  services  not  per- 
formed. That  is  not  the  basis  for  lines.  It  is  the  basis  for 
deductions  for  services  not  performed.  Therefore,  it  is 
necessary  for  us  to  get  the  total  weights  for  that  period 
carried  on  each  of  the  trains,  in  order  to  get  a  relative  value 
for  each  of  the  trains.     (R.  3986,  3987.) 

(E)  WEIGHING  INTERFERES  TO  SOME  EXTENT  WITH 
WORK  IN  THE  POSTAL  CARS. 

^Ir.  McBride  testified  on  direct  examination  as  follows: 

Question  (by  Mr.  Stewart).  *  *  *  What  have  you 
to  say  with  reference  to  the  effect  of  any  weighing  in  the 
cars  iipon  the  time  of  the  clerks,  and  as  to  whether  or  not 
it  interferes  with  distribution  ? 

Answer.  I  think  the  weighing  to  some  extent  interferes 
with  the  distribution,  although  we  make  every  effort  to 
make  such  provision  as  would  prevent  any  serious  inter- 
ference. Of  course,  having  an  additional  man  and  a  scale 
in  a  car  unquestionably  does  interfere  to  some  extent. 

Question.  But,  nevertheless,  if  this  weighing  is  to  be 
made,  you  think  it  should  be  made  in  the  car? 

Answer.  I  do.     (R.  3740.) 

(F)  SUPERVISION  TINDER  RAILROAD  PLAN  OF  WEIGHING 
WOULD   BE  TROUBLESOME   AND   EXPENSIVE. 

Mr.  McBride  testified  on  direct  examination  as  follows: 
The  question  of  supervision  is  another  troublesome  one, 
I  think.  It  would  be  manifestly  impossible  for  the  de- 
partment to  supervise  the  w^eighing  at  all  railroad  stations, 
and  even  if  attempted  at  points  where  a  considerable 
amount  of  mail  is  handled,  it  would  entail  an  expense 
which  would  aggregate  a  \&rge  sum,  and  might  approxi- 
mate the  cost  of  actually  performing  the  w^ork  of  weighing. 
(R.  3742.) 

(G)  NOT  PRACTICABLE  TO  HAVE  WEIGHTS  OF  MAIL  VERI- 
FIED BY  RAILROAD  WEIGHING  AND  INSPECTION 
BUREAUS;   CASES  VERY  DIFFERENT  IN  CHARACTER. 

Mr.  McBride  testified  on  direct  examination  as  follows: 

Question    (by  Attorney  Examhier  Brown).  Now,   the 

railroads  have  what  they  call,  or  they  have  had  in  the  past/, 


r>29 

and  1  suppose  they  are  still  using  them,  what  they  call 
weighing  and  inspection  hureaus.  They  have  one  at 
Buffalo,  with  Mr.  Limberger  in  charge,  I  think.  At 
Chicago  they  used  to  have  Paul  Rainier  in  charo;e.  I  do 
not  know  who  is  there  now.  At  Kansas  City  they  have 
another  outfit,  and  then  there  is  one  in  the  South,  I  think, 
and  one  out  on  the  coast.  Those  are  weighing  and  inspec- 
tion bureaus,  and  they  have  a  force  of  men  who  check  up 
what  is  called  transit,  transit  in  grain,  and  transit  in 
cottonseed  meal,  grain  passing  through  elevators,  going 
in  on  estimated  weights  and  out  again.  They  check  the 
weights  in  and  out,  and  they  also  check  up  "the  weights 
where  the  traffic  comes  in  in  hampers  or  boxes,  like 
cantaloupes  are  shipped,  under  estimated  weights,  as  well 
as  lettuce,  cabbage,  and  so  forth,  which  have  been  shipped 
from  the  Soutli  on  estimated  weights.  I  believe  under  the 
new  classification  that  is  to  be  changed  to  a  car  rate;  but 
that  has  operated  to  reasonable  satisfaction  throughout 
the  country  in  determining  by  the  carriers  the  amount  of 
freight  that  the  shippers  should  pay. 

Do  you  think  there  is  any  difference  in  the  principle 
that  is  now  proposed  by  these  carriers  with  respect  to  the 
weight  of  the  mail,  except  this — and  I  admit  it  is  quite  a 
distmction — that  this  weighing  is  to  be  done  at  the  station 
by  railroad  employees  ? 

Answer.  It  seems  to  me,  Mr.  Examiner,  that  the  cases 
are  very,  very  different.  In  the  case  of  the  mails,  we  have 
to  ascertain  the  ton-miles.  Therefore,  we  have  to  get 
the  mail  on  and  oft'  at  every  station  and  the  total  of  those 
weights  on  and  off  at  every  station  for  the  period  of  the 
weighing.  Otherwise,  we  are  unable  to  obtain  our  ton- 
miles.  I  take  it  that  the  object  in  getting  these  weights  in 
these  weighing  bureaus  that  you  speak  of  is  simply  to 
determine  the  compensation. 

Question.  To  determine  the  charges;  yes. 

Answer.  The  question  of  ton-miles  does  not  enter  into 
it,  except  as  it  is  reflected  in  the  rates  they  charge  for  these 
particular  commodities  ? 

Question.  Of  course,  it  is  very  important  to  the  shipper 
and  the  receiver  that  there  is  transported  no  less  than  is 
paid  for,  and  for  years  and  years  the  public  has  left  it 
with  these  raih'oad  employees  to  determine.  Of  course, 
they  are  sworn  officials.  1  do  not  know  whether  they  are 
bonded  or  not. 

Do  you  know,  Mr.  Burgess,  or  Mr.  Wood,  whether  they 
are  bonded  >. 

Mr.  Wktt].:xg.  I  think  they  are,  but  I  am  not  sure  of 
that. 

122698—19 34 


530 

Attorney  Examiner  Browx.  My  impression  was  that 
they  were  "bonded  employees.  Of  course,  there  is  just  this 
distinction  between  that  class  of  men  and  the  weighers 
that  are  proposed  in  this  case.  They  are  experienced  men. 
They  have  been  in  the  business  a  long  time,  and  are  under 
the  supervision  of  men  who  have  been  conducting  that 
for  a  great  many  years.  Of  course,  it  must  be  assumed 
that  in  weio;hing  the  mails,  there  would  be  supervision  by 
the  railroad  through  experienced  men.  They  might  col- 
lect the  very  heads  of  then-  weighing  and  inspection  bureaus 
to  have  that  in  charge  and  to  see  to  it  that  the  weights 
were  accurate  as  nearly  as  possible,  and  that  the  Post 
Office  Department  should  be  required  to  pay  no  more  than 
the  mail  hauls.  However,  it  is  a  very  much  more  complex 
situation,  because  it  appUes  to  every  station. 

The  Witness.  There  is  another  difference,  it  seems  to 
me,  Mr.  Examiner.  That  is,  the  work  these  men  do  sim])ly 
determines  what  they  will  pay  for  a  s])ecific  shipment, 
while  the  weights  upon  which  this  mail  pay  is  based  will 
cover  the  trans] )ortation  of  the  mails  for  the  })eriod  of  a 
year.  It  seems  to  me  that  that  is  a  ^^ery  vital  difference 
in  the  two  cases. 

Question  (by  Mr.  Wood).  Well,  Mr.  McBride,  this  is 
the  situation  with  the  weighing  of  freight  at  all  these 
stations;  they  enter  the  freight,  they  have  to  make  out  a 
waybill  and  a  bill  of  lading;  it  all  has  to  go  to  the  account- 
ing department;  there  is  just  as  much  machinery  there, 
and  it  does  not  seem  to  be  very  burdensome  in  ascertain- 
ing the  weights  and  the  distance  hauled  and  in  a])plying 
the  rate.  They  are  doing  that. 
Answer.  I  admit  that,  Mr.  ^Yood. 

Question.  They  are  doing  that  right  along.  Now,  why 
can't  they  do  that  with  e([ual  facihty,  under  the  super- 
vision of  men  such  as  the  examiner  mentions,  namely, 
these  weighing  and  inspection  bureau  exjierts,  who  would 
lay  out  the  ])ian  and  sui)er\  ise  the  M'ork  and  do  the  check- 
ing ? 

Answer.  [  admit  it  is  ])hysically  possible,  Mr.  Wood, 
for  the  railroads  to  weigh  the  mails.  1  never  for  a  minute 
would  assert  anytliing  else. 

Question.  There  is  not  any  more  dilliculty,  is  there,  in 
arriving  at  the  truth  with  res]3ect  to  the  weight  of  the 
mails  to  be  weighed  by  the  agent  at  the  station,  than  there 
is  in  ascertaining  the  truth  as  to  the  weight  of  freight  that 
is  ship])ed  out  of  that  same  station  '( 

Answer.  There  is  this  difference,  I  think,  Mr.  Wood, 
that  the  de])artment  has  to  safeguard  its  interest.  The 
individual  sliipj)er,  when  he  takes  a  package  of  freight  to 


531 

the  freight  house,  knows  what  its  weight  is,  just  as  well  as 
you  do,  and  if  the  weight  is  wrong,  and  it  is  not  corrected, 
he  can  make  a  j^rotest  and  have  it  rescinded.  He  knows 
what  that  stuff  weighs,  and  there  is  not  much  chance  for 
the  weight  to  be  wrong,  because  it  will  crop  out  before  he 
pays  his  freight  charge.  On  the  contrary,  as  to  the 
mails,  unless  we  had  a  su])ervisor  at  every  station,  we 
would  have  no  guarantee  that  those  weights  were  correctly 
taken. 

Question.  Well,  the  ordinary  shipper,  in  theory,  may 
<'heck  u[)  the  weights  of  the  railroad  company,  but,  as  a 
matter  of  fact,  he  sends  his  stuff  down  to  the  freight  house 
and  it  is  weighed,  or  he  loads  it  into  the  car  and  it  is  weighed 
on  the  track  scales,  and  he  takes  the  weights. 

Answer.  I  expect  that  is  true  in  practice.  I  do  not 
mean  to  insinuate  that  the  railroads  would  deliberately 
falsify  the  weights. 

Question.  Ko;  1  understand  that  what  you  were  trying 
to  do  is  to  ])rimarily  ])rotect  against  error. 

Answer.  Yes,  sir. 

Question.  Xow,  this  work  that  these  weighing  and  in- 
spection bureau  men  perform  in  connection  with  the 
transit  privileges,  for  instance,  which  the  examiner  has 
referred  to  heretofore,  is  infinitely  more  complicated? 

Answer.  1  think  so;  yes. 

Question.  Than  anything  they  would  have  to  do  in 
order  to  arrive  at  a  check  on  these  mail  weights,  and  if, 
at  important  ])oints,  the  mails  were  weighed  by  experi- 
enced men,  and  at  local  stations,  by  the  station  agent, 
who  usually  is  at  least  as  accurate  an  individual  as  you 
will  find  in  the  community,  as  a  general  projiositionj^  at 
these  small  stations,  and  if  the  reports  and  records  of 
those  men  are  sent  in  to  the  weighing  and  ins]}ection 
bureaus  for  checking  and  consolidation  and  tabulation, 
where  the  Post  Office  Department  might  Jilso  have  its 
representatives,  do  you  see  any  reason  to  believe  that 
you  would  not  have  a  reasonable  accurate  check  on  that 
as  to  the  balancing  on  and  off  and  otherwise? 

Answer.  I  would  not  want  to  express  an  opinion  as  to 
that,  Mr.  Wood.  It  may  be  that  such  a  thing  is  possible. 
(R.  ;^757-;^762.) 


632 

COST  OF  WEIGHING. 

(A)  WEIGHERS  EMPLOYED  DURING  QUADRENNIAL 
WEIGHINGS. 

Mr.  McBride  tostified  on  direct  examination  as  follows: 

I  might  also  state  in  this  connection  the  number  of 
weighers  that  have  been  employed  in  some  of  the  past 
weighings. 

In  1912,  u\  the  second  contract  section,  we  employed  342 
weighers  and  tabulators — ^271  on  trains,  49  at  stations, 
and  22  tabulators  at  division  headquarters.  At  that  time 
the  weights  were  tabulated  at  tlie  various  headquarters. 

In  the  first  contract  section,  a  part  of  which  was  weighed 
in  the  fall  of  1912  and  part  in  the  spring  of  1913,  there  were 
960  weighers  employed— 561  on  trains,  333  at  stations,  and 
66  at  division  headquarters. 

Including  the  10  railway  postal  clerks  detailed  as  tabu- 
lators, the  weighing  of  1914  in  the  fourth  contract  section 
involved  the  employment  of  823  weighers— 585  on  trains, 
185  at  stations,  and  53  at  division  headquarters. 

In  1915,  in  the  third  contract  section,  w^e  had  1,173 
weighers.  The  thhd  contract  section  is  the  heaviest  in  the 
country,  including  the  Middle  Western  States.  We  had 
793  tram  weighers,  321  station  weighers,  and  59  men  at 
division  headquarters  handling  reports.  In  1916,  in  the 
second  contract  section,  we  had  363  weighers.     (R.  3756.) 

(B)  ESTIMATED  COST  OF  WEIGHING  FOR  35  DAYS  ANNU- 
ALLY UNDER  RAILROAD  PLAN  GREATER  THAN 
UNDER  OLD  SYSTEM  OF  QUADRENNIAL  WEIGHINGS. 

Mr.  McBride  testified  on  direct  examination  as  follows: 

Question  (by  Attorney  Examiner  Brown).  As  I  under- 
stand you,  your  proposition  is  that  to  have  an  annual 
weighing,  to  shorten  up  the  period  from  105  days  to  35  days, 
and  to  shorten  the  period  fi'om  four  years  to  annually  is  to 
enormously  increase  the  expense;  also  to  lead  in  the 
direction  of,  if  it  does  not  result  in,  inequalities  either  for 
or  against  the  carriers  or  the  department;  and  that  the 
method  proposed  by  the  railroads  to  have  the  weigliing 
done  by  their  employees,  to  be  supervised  and  checked  by 
the  Post  Office  Department,  would  require  a  great  length 
of  time  in  which  to  determine  the  amount  of  pa^Tnent  for 
all  the  carriers  in  the  country  ?  Is  not  that  the  substance 
of  it? 

jVnswer.  That  is  the  substance  of  it. 

Mr.  Wood.  I  did  not  understand  the  witness  to  say  that 
to  shorten  the  period  from  105  to  35  days  and  make  the 
weighing  annually  would  enormously  increase  the  expense. 


533 

Attorney  Examiner  Brown.  Ho  crave  some  fio;ures  about 
that.  It  may  be  I  have  confused  what  tlie  witness  said 
with  what  appeared  in  the  letter  here. 

^Ii'.  Wood.  I  do  not  understand  the  letter  to  show  that  it 
would  enormously  increase  the  expense,  but,  on  the  con- 
trary, that  it  would  reduce  it. 

The  Witness.  I  do  not  Ivuow  that  I  exactly  understand 
all  of  the  examiner's  questions  in  regard  to  the  expense. 
Could  you  repeat  the  inquiry? 

Attorney  Examhiev  Brown.  Yes.  In  that  letter  it 
says  the  cost  of  a  3o-day  weighing  in  the  tabulation  of  the 
entire  country  would  be  $500,000  a  year.  Multiply  that 
by  4  and  you  would  have  S2, 000, 000,  as  against  $1,326,000. 
That  is  the  way  I  figured  it  in  my  own  mind. 

Mr.  Wood.  I  see. 

The  Witness.  Take  it  for  the  four-year  period.  We 
believe  the  weighing  all  over  the  country  for  35  days  under 
the  old  method  would  cost  more  than  the  weighing  held 
quadrennially  for  105  da3^s. 

Mr.  Wood.  You  do  not  mean  that  each  year? 

The  Witness.  No;  not  each  year,  but  spread  over  the 
entire  four  years.      (R.  3751-3753.) 

(C)  POST  OFFICE  DEPARTMENT  WOULD  NOT  OBJECT  TO 
RAILROADS  PAYING  COST  OF  WEIGHING,ON  A  PROPER 
BASIS. 

Mr.  McBride  testified  on  cross-examination  as  follows: 

Question  (by  Mr.  Wood).  Now,  so  far  as  the  question 
of  taking  the  weights  is  concerned,  you  do  not  see  any 
objection  to  that  part  of  the  plan  of  the  railroad  com- 
pany that  proposes  that  the  railroad  company  shall  pay 
for  it? 

Answer.  Well,  if  a  proper  basis  for  that  payment  were 
arranged,  I  do  not  know  whether  the  department  would 
object  to  that  or  not. 

Question.  If  the  weighing  is  conducted  in  the  manner  in 
which  the  Postmaster  General  thinks  it  should  be  conducted 
or,  let  us  say,  in  the  manner  in  which  the  conmiission 
thinks  it  should  be  conducted,  and  the  railroads  pay  for  it, 
you  do  not  see  any  objection  to  the  payment  part  of  it? 

Answer.  Possibly,  if  the  department  has  entire  control 
of  the  weighers  and  weighing,  and  could  arrange  to  bill 
back  to  the  roads  the  cost  on  particular  routes,  personally 
I  would  see  no  objection  to  that,  if  the  weight  basis  was 
continued  or  agreed  upon  as  the  final  basis.  (R.  3993, 
3994.) 


584 

(D)  THE  RAILROADS  HAVE  NO  OBJECTION  TO  DEPART- 
MENT WEIGHING  AT  OWN  EXPENSE. 

Mr.  WoRTiiiNGTON  testified  on  cross-examination  as  fol- 
lows: 

Question  (by  Mr.  Stewart).  If,  in  fact,  it  would  cost  the 
department  more,  it  would  then  take  away  the  reason  for 
suggesting  it  and  insisting  upon  it? 

Answer.  If  it  cost  the  department  more? 

Question.  Yes. 

Answer.  Oh,  no.  We  are  simply  offering  the  services  of 
the  railroad  employees  to  do  this  weighing,  under  your 
direction. 

Question.  Yes;  that  is  what  I  say. 

Answer.  Of  course,  if  the  department  preferred  to  do  it 
itself  at  its  own  expense,  we  would  have  no  objection  to 
the  past  method  of  weighing;  but  this  was  offered  as  a 
scheme  for  reducing  the  cost  of  weighing,  especially  to  the 
Post  Office  Department.  We  thought  that  that  would  be 
a  plan  that  perhaps  you  would  like.  (R.  1664,  1665.) 
RAILROAD    EMPLOYEES    SHOULD    NOT   BE    PERMITTED 

TO  WEIGH  THE  MAILS. 
(A)  CONGRESS    HAD     GOOD     REASONS    FOR    ENACTING 
LAW  THAT  WEIGHTS  SHOULD  BE  TAKEN  BY   SWORN 
EMPLOYEES  OF  THE  DEPARTMENT. 

Mr.  McBride  testified  on  direct  examination  as  follows : 

In  this  connection  the  advisability  or  propriety  of  re- 
turning to  a  method  of  securing  weights  by  the  railroads, 
which  was  abandoned  many  years  ago,  may  seriously  be 
questioned.  Apparently  the  Congress,  at  the  time  it  en- 
acted legislation  providing  for  a  change  in  the  old  methods, 
and  that  weights  thereafter  should  be  taken  by  sworn 
emploj^ees  of  the  Government,  had  good  reasons  for  its 
action. 

Mr.  Stewart.  May  I  ask  attention  to  the  provisions  of 
the  act  of  March  3,  1875?  The  proviso  is  very  short,  and 
I  would  like  to  have  the  witness  read  it  into  the  record. 

The  Witness.  Section  6: 

The  Postmaster  General  is  hereby  directed  to  have  the  mails  weighed 
as  ofl en  as  now  provided  by  law  l)y  employees  of  the  Post  Office  Depart- 
ment and  have  the  weights  stated  "and  verified  to  him  by  said  employees 
under  such  instructions  as  he  may  consider  just  to  the  Post  Office  Depart- 
ment and  ihe  railroad  companies. 

This  is  the  act  of  March  3,  1875,  18  Stat.,  341.     (R.  3743.) 


535 

(B)  THE  WEIGHING  OF  THE  MAILS  BY  THE  RAILROADS 
WAS  ABOLISHED  BY  LAW. 

Mr.  Stone  testified  on  re-direct  examination  as  follows : 

Question  (by  Mr.  Stewart)  .  I  will  ask  you  whether  you 
recall  that  prior  to  1876  the  railroads  weighed  the  mails  on 
the  railway  mail  routes  ? 

Answer.  I  believe  that  is  so,  ])ut,  of  course,  I  was  not  in 
the  service  in  1876.     *     *     * 

Question.  You  know  it  to  be  a  fact,  though,  that  for 
man}'  years  the  Government,  through  the  Postmaster 
General,  has  weighed  the  mail  ? 

Answer.  Yes,  sir. 

Question.  And  you  have  heard,  at  least,  that  prior  to 
that  time  the  railroads  weighed  the  mails  ? 

Answer.  Yes. 

Question.  You  may  recall  that  the  statute  of  1876 
changed  the  practice,  and  it  was  taken  away  from  the 
railroad  companies  and  reposed  in  the  Postmaster  General  ? 

Answer.  It  was. 

Question.  Even  if  the  railroads  weighed  the  mails,  that 
would  not  finish  the  matter;  the  computation  of  the  aver- 
age daily  weight  would  have  to  be  made  and  be  ascertained? 

Answer.  Yes. 

Question.  Which  would  require  a  large  force  of  specially 
qualified  men  and  clerks  to  do ;  is  not  that  true  ? 

Answer.  Yes,  sir;  that  is  true.     (R.  395,  396.) 

(C)  DEPARTMENT  STILL  HOLDS  VIEW  THAT  IF  WEIGHT 
BE  DETERMINED  THE  PROPER  MEASURE  OF  SERV- 
ICE IT  WOULD  BE  INADVISABLE  TO  DEPART  FROM 
PRACTICE  OF  LAST  30  YEARS. 

Mr.  McBride  testified  on  direct  examination  as  follows; 

Question  (by  Mr.  Stewart)  .  Well,  may  I  ask  you  if  any- 
thing has  occurred  to  change  the  views  of  the  department 
since  that  time  with  reference  to  the  advisability  of  intrust- 
ing the  weighing  to  other  than  the  eniph)yees  of  the  depait- 
mont  'i 

Answer.  I  do  not  think  so.  The  department,  I  think, 
still  holds  to  the  view  that  should  the  commission  deter- 
mine that  weight  is  the  propei-  measure  of  th(^  service,  any 
departure  from  the  practice  of  the  last  30  years  as  regards 
the  weighings  would  be  inadvisable.     (R.  3750.  3751 .) 


536 

(D;  OBJECTION  TO  RAILROADS  WEIGHING  THE  MAILS 
AND  OBJECTIONS  ON  GROUND  OF  COMPLICATED 
ACCOUNTING  AND  MULTIPLICATION  OF  REPORTS. 

Mr.  McBiiiDE  testified  on  cross-examination  as  follows: 

Question  (by  Mr.  Wood).  Is  your  objection — that  is 
what  I  am  trvinj.>:  to  get  clear — is  your  objection  to  the 
weighing  at  the  station  an  objection  as  to  the  prol)able 
accuracy  of  the  weights  obtained,  or  is  it  an  objection  to 
the  ac(;ounting  features  and  the  nudtiplication  of  the  le- 
ports  that  you  think  would  follow  >. 

Answer.  The  latter  i)art  of  your  question  is  one  of  the 
reasons  why  wo  object,  why  wo  think  it  would  not  be  ad- 
visable, and  the  other  ])oint  is  because  we  would  have  so 
man}'  different  weights  on  a  particular  train  that  we  never 
would  get  a  balance.  If  a  train  exchanged  mail  at  50 
stations,  we  would  have  the  weights  taken  at  50  different 
places  by  50  different  people  instead  of  ]\v  one  person,  as 
at  present,  and  we  would  have  those  weights  coming  in  on 
50  different  reports  instead  of  one  report.      (R.  3983,  3984.) 

(E^  OBJECTIONS  TO  WEIGHING  BY  RAILROAD  EMPLOY- 
EES. 

Mr.  Kxox  testified  on  re-cross  examination  as  follows: 

Question  (by  Mr.  Wood).  If  the  weight  basis  should  be 
estabhshed,  what  sort  of  a  scheme  do  you  think  should  be 
inaugurated  in  order  to  provide  (R.  "avoid,"  .s?c)  proper 
protection  to  the  Post  Office  Department  in  the  ascertain- 
ment of  the  weights  ? 

Answer.  At  the  weighing  period,  I  presume  you  mean  ? 

Question.  Yes,  and  as  to  the  general  scheme  of  weighing. 

Answer.  We  would  have  to  go  back  to  the  same  old 
proposition  that  we  did  under  the  old  system;  do  all  the 
weigliing  ourselves. 

Question.  Wliy  could  it  not  be  done  at  the  railroad  sta- 
tions by  men  under  oath  just  the  same  as  shippers  have 
their  freight  weighed  by  sworn  weighmasters  of  the  rail- 
roads % 

Answer.  There  are  70,000  railroad  stations  in  the  coun- 
try. There  would  be  a  weight  report  for  every  train  from 
those  70,000  stations  to  come  down  here  to  Washington, 
and  each  and  every  one  of  those  would  have  to  be  placed 
in  a  pigeonhole  and  then  separated  to  the  several  trains. 
It  would  be  a  labor  that  would  be  almost  absolutel}'  over- 
burdening; could  not  be  done. 

Question.  How  many  railroad  trains  are  there? 

Answer.  I  have  not  counted  them.  There  are  a  great 
many  of  them. 


537 

Question.  It  took  you  30  minutes  to  check  the  emergency 
authorizations  on  one  train  in  one  month  here  a  few 
minutes  ago  from  your  experience.  Do  you  think  that  is 
about  as  burdensome  a  job  as  it  would  be  to  tabulate  the 
weights  ? 

Answer.  To  tabulate  the  weights  from  the  various  sta- 
tions upon  that  same  line,  if  weighed  by  station  weighers, 
would  take  half  a  day  or  longer  on  that  one  train  alone  by 
those  stations  on  and  off  between  Ashland  and  Portland. 

Question.  The  figures  are  in  here  as  to  the  cost  of  the 
April,  1917,  weighings.  You  didn't  seem  to  liave  any  such 
great  difficulty. 

Answer.  Not  the  way  we  weighed  it.  We  would  liave 
to  go  back,  as  I  say,  to  the  old  weights. 

Question.  You  think  tlie  weights  ought  to  be  made  on 
the  trains  and  not  on  the  ground  ? 

Answer.  That  is  the  only  practical  way  of  doing  it. 

Question.  If  that  would  be  done,  you  think  the  Post 
Office  Department  would  then  have  sufficient  protection  ? 

Answer.  We  would  get  along  just  as  well  as  we  did 
before.     (R.  3200,  3201.) 

RAILROADS'  PLAN  CUMBERSOME— WOULD  MANY  TIMES 
MULTIPLY  THE  WORK  OF  TABULATIONS  AND  DELAY 
READJUSTMENTS. 

(A)  RAILROAD  PLAN  OF  WEIGHING  CUMBERSOME  AND 
WOULD  INVOLVE  A  COMPLICATED  AND  LENGTHY 
SYSTEM  OF  TABULATION. 

Mr.  McBride  testified  on  direct  examination  as  foUows: 

The  Witness.  I  believe  the  plan  of  the  railroads  as  to 
the  w^eighing  is  a  cumbersome  one.  I  believe  it  would 
involve  the  handling  of  thousands  of  items  of  weights  in 
the  tabulation  and  woidd  be  such  a  gigantic  calculation 
that  it  would  be  months  before  we  woiud  reach  the  results 
of  the  average  dailv  weiglits. 

*  *  ■  -i:  *  * 

Question  (by  Mr.  ^Stewart).  Mr.  McBride,  I  will  ask  you 
whether  it  is  not  true  that  the  method  of  obtaining  the 
pound-miles  under  tlie  railroads'  plan  would  necessarily  be 
tlic  same  as  the  methods  that  you  are  about  to  describe  as 
having  been  used  under  tlie  old  system  'i 

Answer.  It  would  be  identical  after  the  consolidations 
of  the  total  weights  obtanied.  Up  to  tliat  point  the 
procedure  would  have  to  be  different. 

Question.  Yes;  I  understand  tliat. 

Answer.  Under  a  dilTenMit  metliod  of  obtaining  the 
weights.  I  will  enih^avor  to  point  out  tlie  j>lacc  where  the 
paths  come  together.      (K.  3721,  3725.) 


588 

(B)  WORK   OF   TABULATION   MULTIPLIED   MANY   TIMES 
UNDER  RAILROAD  PLAN  OF  TAKING  THE  WEIGHTS. 

Mr.  McBride  testified  on  direct  examination  as  follows: 

Under  the  railroads'  su(j:.s2:esled  plan,  it  seems  to  me  that 
this  work  would  })e  multiplied  many  times.  If,  instead  of 
receivino:  the  weights  on  these  trains  on  one  card  for  aclay, 
we  were  compelled  to  secure  these  weights  from  individual 
I'cports  for  the  several  stations,  it  would,  I  think,  he  an 
endless  joh. 

Question  (by  Mr.  STEWAur).  Well,  that  is  the  way  they 
would  have  to  be  received  under  the  railroads'  plan,  as  I 
understand  it. 

Answer.  As  1  take  it,  tliat  will  l)e  the  way  we  would 
have  to  do  it.  I  think  it  would  involve  handling  of  a  great 
many  reports  and  the  transfer  of  many  items  from  these 
reports  to  some  sort  of  a  consolidating  sheet  or  card  for 
each  train. 

I  might  slate  that  in  the  old  days  I  think  the  mails  were 
weighed  in  some  divisions  under  such  a  plan,  and  it  %yas 
abandoned,  and  the  present  system  adopted  of  weighing 
by  cards,  as  far  as  possil)le. 

As  a  sample  of  what  I  believe  the  work  would  amount 
to  under  the  railroads'  plan,  I  have  made  an  estimate  of 
the  number  of  reports  to  he  handled  and  the  number  of 
entries  to  he  transfer! ed  to  sheets  or  cards  in  connection 
with  the  weights  on  this  very  train,  21,  of  the  Washington 
and  Hanisonburg  railway  post  office,  for  a  weighing  of 
35  days.  There  are  39  points  on  this  i-oute  where  mails 
are  received  and  dispatclied.  Multiplying  this  by  35 
would  result  in  1,365  reports  to  be  handled  in  order  to  get 
the  weights  for  this  tram  for  the  period.  Of  course,  at 
most  stations  mails  are  both  put  on  and  taken  off,  and  if 
we  followed  the  practice  of  the  department  in  having  the 
"on"  weights  reported  on  a  separate  leport  from  the  "off" 
weights,  there  would  be  two  reports  from  each  station, 
which  would  be  double  the  number  of  reports  to  be  handled. 
It  seems  to  me  that,  contrasted  with  the  method  of  securing 
these  weights  by  train  weighers,  this  would  he  a  recurrence 
to  a  cuml)ersome,  long  drawn-out  method,  that  was  aban- 
doned 1)V  tlie  department  manv  years  ago. 

Question  (by  Mr.  Wood).  Mr  McBride,  why  could  not 
the  station  weigher  on  this  one  card  show  all  the  trains? 

Answer.  I  (h)n't  see  how  lie  could.  How  could  he  get 
the  weights  at  the  remaining  stations? 

Mr.  Wood.  Well,  he  would  not,  but  each  man  at  each 
station  would  get  his  own;  he  would  not  liave  to  have  a 
separate  card  f(>r  every  train. 


539 

The  Witness.  I  don't  wish  to  be  understood  as  saying 
that.  I  figure  that  he  would  report  tiie  weights  of  his 
station  on  one  sheet,  but,  nevertheless,  in  order  for  us  to 
get  the  weight  of  the  particular  trains,  we  w^ould  have  to 
take  those  individual  train  weights  and  transfer  them  to 
some  consolidating  sheet. 

Question.  You  would  have  to  make  them  on  the  same 
kind  of  a  sheet  that  you  make  them  on  now. 

Answer.  And  we  would  have  to  handle  as  many  reports 
as  there  are  stations  in  order  to  get  those  weights. 

Question  (by  jVIi-.  Stewart).  Instead  of  the  one  re- 
port? 

Answer.  Instead  of  the  one  report  rendered  by  tiie  train 
weigher. 

Question  (by  Mr.  Wood).     If  it  does  not  disturb  you 

Answer.  Not  at  all. 

Question.  I  am  trying  to  understand  it  as  you  go  along. 

Answer.  Yes,  sir. 

Question.  You  got  a  report  under  the  old  system  of 
each  train  weigher  on  each  train,  did  you  not? 

Answer.  Yes,  sir. 

Question.  Each  day? 

Answer.  Yes,  sir;  but  that  report  covered — -_  - 

Question.  So  you  got  35  reports  for  the  period  of 

Answer.  Yes,  sir;  pardon  me. 

Question.  Tliat  would  be  35  reports  for  the  period  for 
each  train  ? 

Answer.  That  is  true. 

Question.  Now,  this  way,  your  reports  would  come  not 
from  the  train  weigher,  but  from  the  station  weigher  ? 

Answer.  Eventually  we  would  reach  the  same  result  and 
have  this  card,  after  we  went  through  a  long  process  of 
culling  out  from  these  many  station  reports— these  in- 
dividual reports. 

Question.  Is  there  any  reason  why  the  station  weigher, 
if  you  desired  him  to  do  so,  could  not  render  you  a  con- 
solidated statement  ? 

Answer.  He  could  no  doubt  render  us  a  consolidated 
statement  for  all  the  weights  for  that  train  for  35  days, 
but  whether  w^e  would  consider  it  satisfactory  or  not  would 
be  another  question.  The  question  of  balance  would  come 
in  there,  which  I  will  treat  later.  We  have  to  consider  the 
mails  put  off,  as  well  as  the  mails  taken  on. 

Question.  I  understand.     (R.  3735-3738.^ 


540 

(C)  LENGTH  OF  TIME  NECESSARY  TO  COMPLETE  ADJUST- 
MENTS UNDER  RAILROAD  PLAN  OF  WEIGHING. 

Ml".  McBriue  testified  on  direct  examination  as  follows: 

Answer.  An  idea  of  the  length  of  time  that  would  be 
required  to  complete  the  tabulation  and  adjustments  under 
the  annual  proposition,  the  weighing  to  be  held  in  Septem- 
ber, as  proposed,  may  be  gathered  from  our  experience  in 
connection  with  the  special  statistical  weighing  in  the 
spring  of  1917. 

Question  (by  Mr.  Stewart).  That  is  the  weighing  that 
occurred  in  connection  with  this  hearing? 

Answer.  Yes,  sir;  and  that  was  conducted  under  our 
short-cut  methods,  remember.  That  weighing  covered  the 
entire  country;  all  railroad  mail  routes  were  weighed  for 
35  days,  and  in  a  way,  is  comparable  with  the  railroads' 
proposed  plan  covering  the  same  length  of  time. 

Tlie  tabulations  and  consolidations  connected  with  that 
weighing,  notwithstanding  the  fact  that  they  had  a  very 
large  force  of  clerks  employed,  consumed  upward  of  nine 
months  following  the  completion  of  the  weighing.  In 
fact,  the  work  covering  both  space  and  weight  routes  was 
not  finished  for  more  than  a  year,  but  I  believe  the  work  in 
connection  with  the  weight  routes  only  was  completed 
within  nine  months.  This  could  probably  be  improved 
upon  somewhat,  but,  nevertheless,  I  believe  it  would  be 
fully  six  months  at  the  very  lowest  estimate  before  all 
adjustments  could  be  completed  and  new  rates  of  pay 
fixed,  which  would  make  it  in  April  of  the  following  year 
before  you  would  complete  all  adjustments  dating  back  to 
the  previous  July.  This,  of  course,  would  necessarily  delay 
payments  for  service  from  the  preceding  July. 

Question.  Mr.  McBride,  what  weighing  period  do  you 
predicate  that  upon  ? 

Answer.  I  predicate  it  upon  the  proposed  period  men- 
tioned in  the  railroads'  plan. 

Question  (by  Attorney  Examiner  Brow^n).  September, 
and  dating  back  to  July? 

Answer.  The  second  Tuesday  in  September  of  each 
year.  That  would  make  it  the  middle  of  October  before 
the  weighing  was  completed. 

Mr.  Stewart.  That  is  all  right.  I  wanted  to  identify 
the  month.     I  did  not  remember  that  it  was  in  the  record. 

The  Witness.  Consequently,  the  accounts  with  the 
roads  would  be  in  an  unsettled  condition  for  some  time, 
and  it  is  assumed  that  the  railroads  would  not  be  willing 
to  wait  until  tlie  new  rates  were  fixed  before  receiving  any 
pay  for  mail  service.     I  do  not  moan  by  this  that  none  of 


( 


541 

the  work  would  be  finished  in  six  months.  Of  course,  we 
would  be  making  this  adjustment  during  all  of  this  period, 
and  some  of  the  roads,  of  course,  would  be  completed  and 
the  pay  fixed  long  before  that  time  arrived.  I  think  the 
question  is  one  worthy  of  consideration  in  considering  the 
plan.      (R.  3740-3742/) 

DIVERSIONS  OF  MAILS  RAISE  UNSETTLED  DIFFICUL- 
TIES. 

(A)  CASE  INVOLVING  RIGHT  OF  DEPARTMENT  TO  WEIGH 
DIVERTED  MAIL  DISPUTED  BY  RAILROADS. 

Mr.  Stewaet  stated  during  the  re-direct  examination  of 
Mr.  Gaines  as  follows: 

*  *  *  I  assume  the  commission  will  take  judicial 
notice,  of  course,  of  a  case  that  is  pending  m  the  court, 
but  I  wish  the  record  to  show  that  the  case  is  the  M.  K. 
&  T.  against  the  United  States,  Court  of  Claims  case  32573, 
and  I  "think  I  ma}-  be  permitted  to  say  that  the  basis  of 
the  claim  was  that  the  department  had  no  authority, 
under  the  law,  to  reweigh  the  diverted  mails  unless  they 
reweighed  all  the  mails  upon  the  route  during  the  con- 
tract period.     (R.  3373.) 

(B)  SERVICE  CAN  NOT  BE  STABILIZED  IMMEDIATELY 
FOLLOWING  DIVERSIONS  OF  MAIL  AND  WEIGHING 
HELD. 

Mr.  Gaixes  testified  on  re-dh'ect  examination  as  follows: 

Question  (by  Mr.  Stewart).  Mr.  Wood  referred  to  the 
fact  that,  under  a  weighmg  system,  if  there  are  large 
diversions  of  mail  during  the  contract  period,  those  mails 
may  be  weighed  under  a  provision  of  law  if  they  reach  a 
certain  "per  cent,  and  a  readjustment  made.  Are  you 
acquainted  with  the  facts  or  circumstances  of  the  large 
diversions  of  mail  at  St.  Louis  from  the  St.  Louis  &  San 
Francisco  to  the  Missouri  Pacific  and  the  M.  K.  &  T., 
that  occurred,  I  think,  hi  1912  and  1913^ 

Answer.  I  remember  the  circumstances  very  well. 

Question.  You  know  that  the  weigliing  was  ordered 
after  that  diversion  ? 

Answer.  That  is  the  only  one  I  remember,  Mr.  Stewart — 
that  one  occasion. 

Question.  Do  you  know  how  long  it  was  after  the 
diversion  until  the  weigliing  was  ordered — about  how 
many  months  ? 

Answer.  No.  My  recoUection  is  that  it  was  several 
months,  but  just  what  time  elapsed  I  don't  know.  That 
is  not  clear  in  my  mind.     I  don't  remember. 


542 

Question.  Do  you  know  that  it  was  not  practicable  to 
order  that  reweighing  until  the  full  effect  of  those  diver- 
sions liad  l)ecome  known  and  the  service  stabilized? 

Answer.  That  is  true.  In  a  radical  chano;e  of  that 
khid,  the  service -would  not  be  stabilized  immediately. 

Question.  Do  you  think  that  will  be  tlie  ordinary  con- 
dition foEowhig  a  large  diversion  of  mail  % 

Answer.  Under  weighing  ? 

Question.  Under  weighing. 

Answer.  Certainly.     (R.  3371-3373.) 

UNUSUAL  CONDITIONS  CAN  NOT  BE  MET  UNDER 
WEIGHT  BASIS  SYSTEM. 

(A)  UNUSUAL  CONDITIONS  OCCURRING  DURING  WEIGH- 
ING PERIOD  REFLECTED  IN  PAY  FOR  TERM. 

Mr.  McBride  testified  on  direct  examination  as  follows: 

Answer.  That  is  another  weak  point  in  the  weight 
basis,  by  the  way,  because  in  such  unusual  conditions, 
which  occur  during  the  weighing  period,  they  would  be 
reflected  in  the  pay  for  the  entire  term  for  which  the 
adjustment  was  made,  based  upon  such  weights.      (R.3718.) 

(B^  CONGRESSIONAL  ACTION  NECESSARY  IN  THE  PAST 
TO  COMPENSATE  RAILROADS  FOR  UNUSUAL  CONDI- 
TIONS. 

Mr.  McBride  testified  on  direct  examination  as  follows : 

There  have  been  a  number  of  conspicuous  cases  in  the 
past  where  it  was  found  to  be  necessary  to  secure  con- 
gressional sanction  in  order  to  compensate  the  railroads  for 
the  unusual  conditions  which  occurred  during  the  weighing 
periods. 

For  instance,  during  the  weighing  in  the  fourth  contract 
section,  which  comprises  the  States  west  of  the  Mis- 
souri River  *  *  *  in  1906,  occurred  the  great  San 
Francisco  earthquake,  which,  as  I  understand,  occurred 
early  in  April  of  that  year.  Due  to  that  earthquake  the 
mail  service  was  seriously  disarranged  throughout  the  en- 
tire section;  of  course,  more  so  in  California  and  those 
coast  States,  and  consequently  the  quantity  of  mails  car- 
ried on  those  routes  w^as  very  much  less  than  they  would 
ordinarily  have  carried.  The  department  recognized  this 
situation  and 

Question  (by  Mr.  Stewart).  Right  there,  Mr.  McBride, 
was  there  a  regular  quadrennial  weighing  then  in  progress  % 

Answer.  There  was.  It  had  begun  on  some  date  in  Feb- 
ruary and,  in  regular  course,  would  have  continued  for  15 
weeks. 


To  meet  this  situation,  the  department  reeommcnded  to 
Congress  authority  to  make  the  adjustments  in  this  section 
on  the  basis  of  tlie  49  days  of  the  weighing  (hiring  which 
there  was  no  interruption.  In  other  words,  the  weighing 
had  been  under  way  for  49  (hiys  before  the  earthquake. 
This  authority  was  granted  by  Congress. 

Question.  And  that  adjustment  oouhl  not  have  been 
made  without  an  act  of  Congress  authorizing  it  ? 

Answer.  No,  sir.     *     *     * 

In  1912  another  situation  of  this  kind  arose.  In  that 
year  the  disastrous  floods  in  the  Mississippi  Valley  began 
about  April  1  and  continued  during  the  remainder  of  the 
weighing  period. 

Question.  Was  the  weighing  then  in  progress  ? 

Answer.  The  weighing  had  been  in  progress  since  about 
the  middle  of  February.  That  is,  in  what  is  known  as  the 
second  contract  section,  embracing  the  Southern  States  as 
far  west  as  the  Mississippi  River.  These  floods  naturally 
diverted  weights  from  the  usual  channels  and  also  served 
to  greatly  dex-rease  the  volume  of  the  mails.  In  this  case, 
also,  the  department  was  compelled  to  recommend — it  \yns 
not  compelled  to — but  did  recommend  to  Congress  action 
to  enable  justice  to  be  done  to  the  carriers  as  regards  com- 
pensation for  the  ensuing  four  years. 

Again,  in  1913  it  was  necessary  to  secure  congressional 
authority  to  enable  the  department  to  satisfactorily  adjust 
the  pay  on  certain  routes  because  of  interruptions  in  the 
service  and  decreases  and  diversions  of  mail  resulting  from 
the  floods  in  the  Ohio  Valley  in  the  spring  of  that  year.  In 
the  spring  of  1913,  at  this  time,  a  weighing  was  being  con- 
ducted in  the  flrst  contract  section,  which  includes  the  New 
England  States,  New  York,  Pennsylvania,  Maryland,  Dela- 
ware, Virginia  and  West  Virginia.  These  floods,  of  course, 
rendered  it  necessary  to  make  diversions  of  mail  by  the  south- 
ern routes,  and  in  consequence  the  mails  carried  on  a  great 
many  routes  running  into  the  flooded  section,  as  well  as  on 
routes  to  which  the  mails  were  diverted,  and  therefore  the 
weights  carried  were  not  normal;  they  were  a})normal  oii 
some  of  those  routes.  Under  tiie  space  basis,  of  course, 
these  lines  would  have  been  taken  care  of  automatically. 

Question.  That  is,  from  day  to  day  ? 

Answer.  Yes,  sir.  The  department  reported  these  facts 
to  Congress,  and  secured  authority  to  malve  adjustments  in 
the  same  manner  as  was  made  in  1912.     (R.  3720-3723.) 


544 

(C^  UNUSUAL  CONDITIONS  BETTER  TAKEN  CARE  OF  BY 
SPACE  BASIS  SYSTEM  THAN  BY  WEIGHT  BASIS  SYS- 
TEM. 

Mr.  McBride  testified  on  cross-exuniiiiation  as  follows: 

Question  (by  Mr.  Wood).  Now,  Mr.  McBride,  with  re- 
lation to  some  of  the  other  questions  involved  in  this  case, 
in  your  discussion  of  the  weighing,  you  recited  certain  in- 
stances in  which  the  annual  weighing  would  not  take  into 
account  certain  unusual  mail  movements.  My  recollection 
is  that  all  of  those  cases  were  the  direct  outgrowth  either  of 
the  war  or  floods  or  earthquakes  ? 

Answer.  The  specific  cases  I  cited  were  of  that  character. 

Question.  Yes. 

Answer.  But  other  unusual  conditions  are  constantly 
arising  in  the  service. 

Question.  Now,  so  far  as  the  floods  are  concerned,  the 
adoption  of  September  as  the  weighing  period  would  prac- 
tically obviate  that  matter  ? 

Answer.  I  think  the  floods  probably  are  not  as  plentiful 
in  September  as  they  are  in  April. 

Question.  No;  and  as  I  take  it,  the  purpose  of  that  was 
to  show  that  the  carriers  would  be  better  off  under  a  space 
basis  than  under  a  weight  basis '? 

Answer.  Well,  we  felt  that  those  conditions  that  I 
recited  there  would  be  better  taken  care  of  by  a  space  basis 
than  the  weight  basis,  so  far  as  the  carriers  are  concerned. 
(R.  3962,3963.) 

THE  WEIGHT  BASIS  SYSTEM  GIVES  NO  RECOGNITION  TO 
FREQUENCY  OF  SERVICE,  WHICH  IS  EXACTLY  COMPEN- 
SATED FOR  UNDER  THE  SPACE  BASIS  SYSTEM. 

WEIGHT  BASIS  GIVES  NO  RECOGNITION  TO  FREUUENCY 
OF  SERVICE. 

Mr.  McBride  testified  on  direct  examination  as  follows: 

I  believe  that  the  scale  proposed  in  the  railroad  plan 
does  not  recognize  as  accurately  the  variable  weights  as 
does  the  old  rate  scale  embraced  in  the  old  law,  and,  of 
course,  has  all  the  defects  of  that  basis  in  giving  no  recog- 
nition whatever  to  the  frequency  of  service.  No  weight 
basis  gives  any  consideration  to  the  frequency  of  service. 
In'other  words,  a  railroad  w^hich  carries  5,000  pounds  per 
day  on  two  trains,  one  each  way,  receives  exactly  the  same 
pay  on  the  weight  basis  as  a  road  carrying  5,000  pounds  in 
ten  trains  per  day.  To  my  mind  this  is  one  of  the  weak 
points  in  any  weight  basis,  because  frequency  of  service  is 


545 

unquestionably  a  large  factor  in  the  cost  of  performing  the 
service  by  the  railroad  company  as  well  as  in  securing  good 
service  for  the  people.  It  certainly  costs  the  company 
more  to  haul  a  15-foot  apartment  four  round  trips  daily, 
carr34ng  a  total  of  5,000  pounds  in  all  of  those  trains,  than 
it  does  to  haul  the  same  car  one  round  trip,  even  though  it 
carries  actually  the  same  amount  of  weight.  The  amount 
of  mail  carried  in  the  car  does  not  materially  increase  the 
cost,  but  the  multiplied  operation  does  increase  the  cost. 
The  space  basis  recognizes  both  the  factors  of  frequency 
and  cost  of  operation  in  a  way  that  is  impossible  under  a 
w-eight  basis.     (R.  3713.) 

WEIGHT-BASIS  SYSTEM   DOES  NOT  TAKE  INTO  CONSID- 
ERATION THE  FREQUENCY  OF  SERVICE. 

Mr.  Kxox  testified  on  re-direct  examination  as  follows : 

Question  (b}^  Mr.  Steavaet)  .  You  have  referred  to  the 
measure  of  service  as  indicated  by  the  weight  of  the  mails 
ascertained  by  a  weighing.  I  will  ask  you  whether  it  is 
not  true  that  the  mere  weight  of  the  mails  can  not  possibly 
take  into  consideration  one  of  the  most  important  elements 
in  the  operation  of  trains,  namely,  the  frequency  of  service. 

Answer.  That  is  true.  A  line  carr3'ing  a  good  deal  of 
weight  of  mails  with  20  to  30  trains  a  day  will  receive 
exactly  the  same  compensation  as  a  line  carrying  the  same 
weight  of  mail  with  one  or  two  trains  a  day  over  the  road. 

Question.  And  the  amount  of  service  rendered  in  the 
one  case  is  not  the  same  as  the  amount  rendered  in  the 
other  case  ? 

Answer.  There  is  a  vast  difference  in  the  amount  of 
service  rendered  b}^  the  two  companies. 

Question.  And  is  it  not  true  that  the  difference  in  the 
service  rendered  by  different  carriers  throughout  the 
countr}",  and  sometimes  as  represented  by  full  groups  of 
carriers  throughout  the  country,  varies  greatly  ? 

Answer.  That  service  does  vary  greatly. 

Question.  Have  you  in  mind  any  cases  which  might 
typify  that  condition  of  variance  ?  Are  you  familiar  with 
the  eastern  part  of  the  country  ? 

Answer.  In  a  general  way.  I  know  that  in  the  eastern 
part  of  the  country  out  of  these  large  eastern  cities  there 
are  trains  departing  from  the  initial  terminal  ever}'  few 
minutes,  you  might  say,  or  a  great  many  during  tlie  day, 
and  that  on  western  lines  frequently  the  bulk  of  mail  carried 
is  on  one  train.  For  instance,  the  Great  Northern  carries 
on  one  train  a  day  probably  half  its  entire  mail  volume, 
once  every  24  hours  in  one  train. 

122698—19 35 


546 

Question.  To  mention  a  specific  instance,  is  that  true 
in  regard  to  the  Long  Island  road?  You  may  not  be 
famihar  with  it  ? 

Answer.  I  only  know  the  Long  Island  road  from  the 
knowledge  that  it  is  a  strictly  suburban  line  with  a  great 
number  of  passenger  trains  operating  a  short  distance, 
close  together.     I  have  never  been  out  on  the  line  at  all. 

Question.  Is  it  claimed  to  be  true  with  reference  to  the 
New  Haven  ? 

Answer.  Yes;  that  is  claimed  to  be  true  that  the  pag- 
scnger-train  service  is  very  complex  and  a  great  number  of 
trains  are  handled  each  day  over  the  line. 

Question.  So  that  as  a  matter  of  fact  it  is  impossible  for 
the  weight  of  the  mails  to  fairly  measure  the  service  and  the 
value  of  the  service  performed  in  passenger  trains  ? 

Answer.  I  think  so.     (R.  3226,  3227.) 

SPACE  BASIS  PAYS  FOB  EVERY  MILE  OF  SERVICE  REN- 
DERED, THUS  RECOGNIZING  FREQUENCY. 

Mr.  McBride  testified  on  cross-examination  as  follows: 

Question  (by  Mr.  Wood).  Now,  Mr.  McBride,  irrespec- 
tive of  the  basis — you  and  I  do  not  kno^v  what  basis  the 
commission  is  going  to  adopt — but  you  think  that  in  con- 
nection with  the  closed-pouch  service,  the  rate  for  which 
or  the  pay  for  which,  should  take  into  account  the  fre- 
quency of  service  ? 

Answer.  Unquestionably. 

Question.  Yes. 

Answer.  Frequency  of  service  is  an  element. 

Question.  And  that  ought  to  be  done  in  this  3-cent  rate? 

Answer.  That  is  the  mainspring  of  our  space-basis 
plan — the  payment  for  service  rendered  and  for  every 
mile  of  service  rendered.     (R.  3975.) 

FREQUENCY  OF   SERVICE  A  FACTOR  THAT   SHOULD  BE 
CONSIDERED  IN  FIXING  A  RATE. 

Mr.  McBride  testified  on  cross-examination  as  follows: 

Question  (bv  Mr.  Wood).  Coming  down  to  another  class 
of  cases,  Mr.  McBride,  you  criticized  the  railroad  plan, 
because  it  did  not  compensate  for  frequency  of  service,  you 
said  ? 

Answer.  The  weight  basis  part  of  it. 

Question.  Yes;  did  not  compensate  for  frequency  of 
service,  and  you  think,  do  you,  that  frequency  of  service 


647 

is  a  thing  that  should  receive  some  additional  compensa- 
tion ? 

Answer.  I  should  say  that  frequency  of  service  is  one 
of  the  factors  that  should  be  considered  in  fixing  your  rate. 
(R.  3973,  3974.) 

THE  RAILROADS'  PLAN  INVOLVES  DOUBLE  PAYMENT  FOR 
PART  OF  THE  MAILS,  THE  TRANSFER  OF  THE  HANDLING 
OF  SOME  MAILS  FROM  THE  RAILROAD  EMPLOYEES  TO  THE 
POSTAL  CLERKS,  AND  OTHER  OPERATING  DIFFICULTIES. 

RAILROADS'  PLAN  OY  PAYMENT  WILL  RESULT  IN  DOU- 
BLE PAYMENT  FOR  CARRIAGE  OF  MAILS  CARRIED 
IN  THE  DISTRIBUTION  END  OF  MAIL  CARS. 

Mr.  McBride  testified  on  direct  examination  as  follows: 

In  considering  the  effect  of  this  demand  for  distributing 
facilities,  it  seems  to  me  that  there  will  be  a  double  pay- 
ment with  respect  to  the  weight  of  mails  carried  in  the 
distributing  part  of  the  car,  which  does  amount  to  consid- 
erable in  some  cases,  for  this  reason,  this  mail  that  has  been 
received  and  distributed  in  those  sacks  that  hang  in  the 
rack,  and  all  of  that  matter  that  has  been  received  and  dis- 
tributed before  the  train  leaves,  of  course,  leaves  more 
space  for  mail  to  be  carried  in  the  storage  end. 

Question  (by  Mr.  Wood).  This  pay  does  not  cover  the 
number  of  feet  in  the  storage  end. 

Answer.  I  understand  that,  but  it  does  cover  the  pay 
for  the  weight  carried  in  the  sacks  that  are  hung  in  the 
rack. 

Question.  How  much  does  that  amount  to  in  a  15-foot 
apartment  car  ? 

Answer.  Well,  it  amounts  to  considerable  on  some  lines. 

Question.  What? 

Answer.  I  would  not  undertake  to  say  how  much,  but 
I  just  suggest  that  as  a  consideration. 

Question.  It  is  not  intended  as  any  pay  for  the  weight; 
it  is  intended  as  pay  for  these  distributing  fixtures  which 
occupy  that  space  in  the  car. 

Answer.  But  it  is  based  upon  the  average  passenger  car 
revenue  for  the  full  car. 

Question.  Yes. 

Answer.  And  it  is  prorated  on  that. 

Question.  Well,  there  is  not  anything  for  the  postal 
clerk,  who,  so  far  as  occupying  space  in  that  car  is  con- 
cerned, at  3  cents  a  mile,  is  worth  more  than  the  weight 
pay  on  that  would  be. 

Answer.  Well,  they  balance  each  other  then. 


548 

Mr.  Stewart.  The  witness  is  simply  pointing  out  thee 
fact  that  while  the  maximum  rate  is  fixed  for  the  distrib- 
uting: unit^  the  maximum  rate  is  also  fixed  and  exacted  for 
the  Weight  of  the  mail  carried  therein. 

The  Witness.  That  is  true.  The  weight  rates  are  based 
pro  rata  upon  the  average  60-foot  car-mile  revenue  in  the 
passenger  service  as  computed  by  the  railroads  and  shown 
on  their  Exhibit  No.  3,  or  29.29  cents,  increased  by  certain 
per  cents  to  cover  the  excess  and  unauthorized  operations 
considered  necessary  by  the  railroads.  In  the  full  cars 
this  figure  is  4.2  per  cent,  and  in  the  apartment  cars  40 
per  cent,  according  to  the  statements  of  Mr.  Worthington. 
These  per  cents  are,  of  course,  based  upon  the  railroads' 
treatment  of  the  unused  and  unauthorized  and  excess  and 
unoccupied  space,  with  which  treatment  the  department, 
of  course,  dissents,  and  feels  it  is  grossly  unfair  to  the 
mails,  all  of  which  has  an  effect  upon  the  rates  which  they 
propose  for  these  distributing  facilities.     (R.  3776-3778.) 

RAILROAD  PLAN  WOULD  RESULT  IN  MAILS  NOW  BEING 
HANDLED  IN  BAGGAGE  CARS  BEING  TRANSFERRED 
TO  THE  MAIL  CARS. 

Mr.  McBride  testified  on  direct  examination  as  follows : 
Question  (by  Mr.  Stewart).  Now,  Mr.  McBride,  before 
leaving  the  question  of  distribution  facilities  or,  rather,  the 
use  of  them  as  provided  for  under  the  railroads'  plan,  and 
bearing  in  mind  the  size  of  the  units  and  the  fact  that  over- 
size units  may  be  supplied  by  the  railroads  to  take  care  of 
authorizations  of  lesser  space,  and  assuming  that  this 
excess  space  in  these  units  named  would  be  used  for  the 
storage  of  mails,  what  have  you  to  say  with  reference  to 
the  transfer,  if  any,  that  would  effect  from  the  railroad 
employees  to  the  postal  employees  with  respect  to  the 
delivery  of  those  mails  in  cars  ? 

Answer.  I  am  inclined  to  think  that  the  practical  result 
would  be  that  there  would  be  a  tendency  on  the  part  of  the 
railroad  employees  to  have  all  the  mail  possible  handled  in 
the  postal  car,  and  if  the  company  had  cars  of  larger  size 
than  those  called  for  by  the  authorization  and  ran  them  in 
fulfillment  of  that  authorization,  it  would  result  in  more 
mail  being  carried  in  the  postal  cars  than  would  otherwise 
be  carried  there,  and  therefore  there  would  be  that  ad- 
ditional burden  on  the  railway  postal  clerks.  This  matter 
has  been  one  that  has  been  a  source  of  considerable  dis- 
agreement and  controversy  between  the  postal  clerks  and 
railway  trainmen  from  time  immemorial.  The  railroad 
trainmen  have  contended  that  the  clerks  ought  to  carry 


549 

more  mail  in  the  postal  car,  and  the  railway  postal  clerks 
have  argued  the  other  way. 

Question  (by  Attorney  Examiner  Brown).  Well,  looking 
at  it  in  a  matter  in  the  abstract,  without  reference  to  any 
concrete  cases,  the  distribution  of  the  mails  and  its  handling 
is  practically  in  the  hands  of  the  Post  Ofiicc  Department, 
is  it  not? 

Answer.  Yes,  sh;  but  the  transportation  of  it  is  the  duty 
of  the  railroad,  and  the  mails  that  would  be  carried  in  the 
baggage  car  are  usually  mails  that  have  been  already 
dis1:ributed,  and  mails  requiring  no  further  distribution  on 
the  train — simply  made-up  matter.  It  would  only  happen 
in  cases  where  the  companies  chose  to  run  a  30-foot  car 
for  a  15-foot  distributing  facility.  You  see  there  would  be 
15  additional  feet  in  that  car  more  than  needed  by  the 
department. 

Question.  Well,  we  have  had  some  little  evidence  where 
postal  clerks,  for  their  own  purposes,  conveyed  the  mail 
into  the  storage  car.  You  remember  that,  don't  you,  or 
were  you  not  here  ? 

Answer.  I  don't  think  that  that  is  done  now  under  the 
space  basis.  Where  they  can  carry  it  m  the  postal  car  it 
is  carried  there.  Under  the  old  weight  basis  the  tendency 
was  that  way,  I  think,  on  the  part  of  the  postal  clerks. 

Question,  Well,  if  you  had  15  feet  of  vacant  space  in  a 
railway  post-office  car,  or  apartment  car,  distributing  car, 
what  is  the  objection  to  having  that  space  occupied  by  the 
mail? 

Answer.  The  objection  would  be  that  we  would  be  han- 
dling mail  that  if  they  furnished  a  car  of  the  authorized  size 
would  be  handled  in  the  baggage  car  by  the  raUroad  people, 
and  under  their  plan,  for  which  they  were  being  paid  on  the 
weight  basis,  no  distribution  of  it  whatever. 

Mr.  Stewaet.  This  mail  would  be  carried  in  the  other 
part  of  the  car  if  the  units  asked  for  were  supphed,  and  being 
carried  in,  say,  the  other  end  of  the  car,  the  delivery  of  that 
man  would  devolve  on  the  raQroad  employees  as  it  now 
does;  but  having  furnished  the  oversize  unit,  and  it  being 
in  the  interest  of  the  railroads  to  fill  that  unit  with  mail  as 
far  as  they  could  and  relieve  the  rest  of  the  car,  the  storage 
mail  would  undoubtedly  be  carried  in  the  oversize  distri- 
bution unit,  and  that  would  throw  upon  the  post-office 
emploj-ees  the  duty  of  deUvering  that  mail  from  the  car, 
and  the  railroads  would  be  paid  for  that  service  on  the 
basis  of  weight,  which  would  include  that  service. 

The  Witness,  In  some  cases. 

Mr.  Wood.  That  is  the  testimony  here. 

The  Witness.  Yes,  sh-;  that  is  true.     (R.  3797-3800.) 


550 

PAYMENT  ON  SPACE  BASIS  FOR  FULL  SPACE  AND  MAILS 
IN  DISTRIBUTING  CAR  AND  ON  WEIGHT  BASIS  FOR 
MAILS  IN  BAGGAGE  CAR  WOULD  ENTAIL  DIFFICUL- 
TIES IN  THE  WAY  OF  CONTINUING  CONDITIONS  THAT 
EXISTED  DURING  WEIGHING  PERIOD. 

Mr.  McBride  testified  on  direct  examination  as  follows: 

Question  (bv  Dr.  Lorenz).  Bearing  on  your  testimony 
regarding  the  friction  as  to  the  question  of  how  much  rnail 
should  be  carried  in  the  railway  post-office  car,  as  against 
the  baggage  car,  I  would  like"^  to  ask  you  this  question : 
Suppose  that  you  had  a  system  of  payment  by  which  your 
railwa}^  post-office  car  or  apartment  car  were  paid  for  in 
full  on  the  space  basis,  regardless  of  what  was  in  the  car, 
and  that  you  were  paid  for  the  weight  basis  on  the  basis  of 
what  was  carried  in  the  baggage  car  as  shown  by  the  weigh- 
ing period,  would  not  that  automatically  end  that  ques- 
tion ?  Then,  it  would  be  to  the  interest  of  the  department, 
would  it  not,  to  put  as  much  as  possible  into  the  standard 
car,  whatever  might  be  its  length? 

Answer.  Unquestionabl}^,  on  the  facts  as  you  state 
them,  it  would  be  to  the  advantage  of  the  department,  but 
it  seems  to  me,  though,  that  your  combined  weight  and 
space  basis,  as  vou  outline  it  there,  would  result  in  even 
more  serious  difficulties,  because  if  you  confine  certain 
mails  to  the  baggage  cars  and  certain  mails  to  the  postal 
cars  during  the  weighing  period  there  would  be  constant 
friction  after  the  weighing  period  as  to  the  mails  which 
are  carried  in  those  respective  units.  The  railroads  would 
assert  that  we  were  putting  more  mail  in  the  baggage  car 
than  we  should,  and  vice  versa.  It  seems  to  me  it  would 
be  very  difficult  to  continue  the  same  conditions  exist- 
ing during  your  weighing  period  subsequent  thereto. 
(R.  3802,  3803.) 

ANNUAL  WEIGHINGS. 
ANNUAL  WEIGHING  NOT  OPPOSED  BY  DEPARTMENT. 

Mr.  McBride  testified  on  direct  examination  as  follows : 

As  to  the  proposition  of  weighing  annually,  I  do  not 
think  the  department  has  ever  taken  the  position  that 
they  oppose  an  annual  weighing,  if  Congress  chose  to  leg- 
islate to  that  end.  The  matter  had  been  before  Congress 
a  great  many  times,  and  they  never  had  so  framed  their 
appropriation  as  to  provide  for  an  annual  weighing,  and, 
therefore,  no  annual  weighing  was  ever  had  by  the  depart- 
ment.    (R.  3743.) 


551 

F    WEIGHT    BASIS    ADOPTED,    WEIGHINGS     SHOULD    BE 
FOB  35  DAYS  AND  CONDUCTED  UNDER  OLD  PLAN. 

Mr.  McBr[de  testified  on  direct  examination  as  follows : 

Question  (by  Attorney  Examiner  Browx).  Suppose  the 
commission  should  decide — and,  of  course,  I  assume  that 
thev  will  decide — that  there  should  be  an  annual  weighing. 
Wliat  plan  would  ,you  suggest  for  that  ?  Would  the  rail- 
road proposition  of  105  days,  as  under  the  old  system 

Answer.   I  would  favor,'^ under  the  conditions  as  stated 
by  you,  a  35-day  weighing. 
^  Question.  Thirty-five  ? 

Answer.  Yes. 

Question.  And  under  the  old  system  that  was  to  be 
weighed  on  the  train  b}-  employees  of  the  Post  Office 
Department  ? 

Answer.   I  would  advocate  the  old  system  of  weighing. 
(R.  3755.) 
AVERAGE  PERIOD  FOR  ANNUAL  WEIGHING. 

Mr.  McBride  testified  on  direct  examination  as  follows : 

Question  fby  Mr.  Ashbaugh)  .  What  time  of  the  year, 
Mr.  McBride? 

Answer.  I  was  going  to  touch  on  that.  I  am  not  fully 
satisfied  as  to  what  time  of  the  year  we  would  want  to  hold 
that  weighing,  although  possibly  the  time  suggested  by  the 
railroads  is  as  fair  as  any,  on  the  average. 

Question  (by  Attorney  Examiner  Brown).  That  is,  Sep- 
tember would  be  a  normal  month,  would  it  ? 

Answer.  I  made  some  investigations  along  that  line, 
based  entirely,  of  course,  on  the  revenue.  Probably  that 
is  the  only  thing  I  could  base  it  on,  and  I  found  that  the 
months  of  April  and  September  are  the  nearest  to  the 
average,  as  a  rule,  for  a  number  of  years  past,  in  the  reve- 
nues to  the  Post  Office  Department.     (R,.  3755.) 

RATES  SHOULD  BE  BASED  OX  GENERAL  AVERAGE. 
THE  PROPOSED  RATES  ARE  AVERAGES. 

After  considerable  discussion  of  the  railroad's  proposed 
rates  and  the  absence  of  any  provision  for  separate  terminal 
charges  (R.  1669-1675),  Mr.  Worthington  testified  as 
follows : 

Attorney  Examiner  Brown.  That  is  to  say,  after  all  is 
said  and  done,  you  are  attempting  by  your  figures  to  reach 
as  near  an  average  as  you  can  ? 

The  Witness.  Yes,  sir;  that  is  the  object  of  it.  (R. 
1675.) 


552 

BATE  PROPOSITION  MUST  BE  TBEATED  ON  A  GENEBAL 
AVEBAGE  BASIS. 

Mr.  McBride  testified  on  cross-examination  as  follows: 

Question  (by  Mr.  Wood).  With 'respect  to  some  features 
of  the  carriers'  claim  whicli  you  have  been  discussing  in 
connection  with  the  3-cent  rate,  I  will  ask  you  whether  you 
do  not  think  that  the  service  in  baggage  cars,  closed-pouch 
service,  ought  to  pay  a  higher  rate  under  any  basis  of  pay 
than  is  paid  for  storage  service  or  for  apartment-car 
service? 

Answer.  It  seems  to  me  we  have  to  treat  this  proposition 
upon  general  averages,  and  general  averages  ascertained 
upon  cost  of  the  service,  it  seems  to  me,  have  got  to  be  the 
basis  for  fixing  the  rate. 

Question.  Now,  Mr.  McBride,  we  are  making  a  rate  here 
to  apply  to  the  several  different  classes  of  service.  What- 
ever may  be  the  final  general  average  result,  the  rate  for 
each  particular  class  of  service  should  be  as  nearly  fitted  to 
that  service  as  it  can  be,  should  it  not  ? 

Answer.  I  think  the  whole  service  should  be  taken  into 
consideration. 

Question.  Well,  it  is  quite  possible  that  you  and  I  are  not 
talking  about  the  same  thing.  Different  carriers  perform 
dift'erent  kinds   of   service,   do   they   not? 

Answer.  Yes;  you  may  say  there  are  dift'erences  between 
the  dift'erent  services. 

Question.  Some  carriers  have  heavy  storage  service,  and 
some  carriers  have  a  great  deal  of  railway  post-office  serv- 
ice, the  same  carriers  have,  as  a  rule,  to  others,  a,  disproffor- 
tionate  amount  of  closed-pouch  service.  That  is  true,  is  it 
not? 

Answer.  I  think  so;  yes. 

Question.  Now,  if  there  is  going  to  be  a  fair  distribution 
of  the  money,  is  it  not  essential  not  only  that  a  general 
average  rate  be  a  fair  rate,  but  that  the  rates  for  these  three 
several  classes  of  service  shall  each  be  as  nearly  adjusted  and 
fitted  to  the  characteristics  and  requirements  of  that  service 
as  it  is  possible  to  do  it  ? 

Answer.  I  do  not  think  you  can  ^o  into  the  refine- 
ments of  each  class  of  service  like  that  in  such  a  large  and 
general  service  that  covers  the  entire  country.  If  you  fix  a 
different  rate  for  closed-pouch  service  in  one  section  of  the 
country,  it  might  not  be  adequate  on  some  other  route.  It 
seems  to  me  if  you  are  going  into  that,  you  are  going  in 
pretty  deep.  You  would  have  to  fix  the  service  on  each 
train  on  each  route. 


553 

Question.  Your  Exhibit  No.  81,  containing  Post  Office 
Department  rates,  does  not  contemplate  any  difference  in 
rates  at  all  per  car-mile  for  the  different  classes  of  service, 
does  it? 

Answer.  No,  sir. 

Question.  It  makes  the  rate  the  same  for  the  closed-pouch 
and  storage  in  the  railway  post  office  ? 

Answer.  They  are  prorated — the  rates. 

Question.  Yes.  Now,  under  our  plan,  we  would  under- 
take to  fix  the  rates  as  applicable  to  the  several  classes  of 
the  service  itself ;  is  not  that  right  ? 

Answer.  I  take  it  that  that  was  the  object  of  the  plan. 

Question.  If  that  can  be  done,  don't  you  think  that  is 
a  fairer  method  than  it  is  to  take  a  general  average  rate 
-and  apply  it  not  only  to  the  storage  car,  but  also  the  rail- 
way post-office  car,  and  to  the  closed-pouch  service? 
Don't  you  think  it  is  fairer,  if  it  can  be  done,  to  try  to 
devise  a  scheme  of  rates  which,  instead  of  resulting  in 
the  application  of  a  general  average  from  all  classes  of 
service,  wiU  present  a  scale  for  each  class  that  is  adjusted 
and  fitted,  as  nearly  as  possible,  to  the  conditions  of  that 
service  ? 

Answer.  As  I  said  before,  I  think  the  rates  ought  to 
be  based  upon  a  general  average.  It  seems  to  me  that 
this  rate  of  3  cents  a  mile,  which  results,  as  I  have  shown, 
in  an  exorbitant  pav  on  some  trains,  would  be  exceedingly 
inadvisable  for  that  reason.     (R.  3964-3967.) 

CONSIDERATION  OF   BASES  FOR   RATES. 

HATE  SHOULD  BE  BASED  UPON  USE  OF  THE  PROPERTY 
EMPLOYED. 

Mr.  Wettlixg  testified  on  cross-examination  as  follows: 

Question  (by  Mr,  Stew^aet).  In  connection  with  your 
Exhibit  4,  I  think  it  was — I  am  not  referring  to  that  for 
analysis  now — you  gave  it  as  your  opinion  that  a  rate 
should  be  fixed  on  the  use  of  the  property  employed  in  the 
handling  of  the  mails.  That  I  take  it  to  be  an  expression 
of  what  you  conceive  to  be  a  sound  principle?  Is  that 
your  ])osition  ? 

Answer.  Yes.  sir. 

Question.  What  use  did  the  Post  Office  De])artment 
get  of  this  extra  operation  of  cars  and  these  oversize 
cars? 

Answer.  Well,  I  guess  it  is  their  claim  that  they  got 
none.  We  claim  that  the  mode  of  administration  enforced 
the  operation  of  them,  whether  they  were  actually  used 


554 

by  tlie  Post  Office  Department  or  not,  in  just  the  same 
nianner  as  we  are  forced  to  carr}^  back  an  empty  coal 
car  in  order  to  be  able  to  load  it  for  the  next  trip — not 
in  exactly  that  same  analogy,  but,  in  a  sense,  broadly 
spealving. 

Question.  Your  theory  of  use,  however,  depends  entirely 
upon  your  theory  of  the  extent  of  use  to  which  the  Post 
Office  Department  participated  in  these  excess  and  surplus 
movements,  depends  entirely  upon  these  questions  of 
fact  which  we  have  been  discussing,  as  to  whether  or  not 
it  was  practicable  for  the  railroad  companies  to  operate 
these  cars  in  a  different  manner  ? 

Answer.  Well,  I  of  course  am  free  to  admit  that  if  the 
raih-oad  company  operated  the  equipment  which  they 
could  easily  avoid  operating,  they  can  not  really  enforce 
a  claim  or  demand  justlv  for  compensation  for"  it. 
(R.  1281,  1282.) 

THE  CONTROVERSY  OVER  UNUSED  SPACE  DOES  NOT 
AFFECT  THE  QUESTION  AS  TO  WHETHER  PAYMENT 
SHALL  BE  MADE  ON  THE  BASIS  OF  SPACE  OR  WEIGHT. 

In  reply  to  Dr.  Lorenz's  questions,  Mr.  Wettling  testi- 
fied as  follows: 

Question.  ^Vll  of  this  controversy  that  exists  with  re- 
spect to  the  treatment  of  unused  space  is  in  no  wise  con- 
nected with  the  payment,  whether  the  payment  should 
be  on  the  basis  of  space  or  weight,  is  it  ? 

Answer.  No,  sir. 

Question.  If  you  were  trying  to  determine  a  rate  to  be 
applied  per  hundred  pounds  or  per  ton-mile,  you  would 
still  have  to  determine  this  ciuestion,  would  jou  not,  if 
you  were  settling  it  on  a  cost  basis  ? 

Answer.  Yes,  that  would  have  to  be  determined  in  the 
same  manner  ultimately  anyway,  because,  just  as  we 
are  in  the  freight  situation,  we  are  interested  in  the  amount 
of  space  that  we  have  to  furnish.  Therefore  we  have 
minimum  weights  on  the  cars  so  that  a  man  can  not  take 
a  car  from  us  and  make  us  run  it  from  one  end  of  the 
country  to  the  other  with  a  very  small  weight,  and  neces- 
sarily a  small  revenue.  Therefore  our  minimum  weight 
prescribes  a  minimum  revenue  which  we  shall  receive  for 
a  certain  service,  which  necessarily  is  rendered  by  the 
cost  of  rendering  that  service.  Basically  it  may  not  be 
expressed  in  just  those  terms,  but  ultimately  that  is  what 
it  means,  in  its  ultimate  analysis.     (11.  1354,  1355.) 


555 

RATES  FIXED  UPON  THE  EXCESSIVE  OPERATION  BE- 
FORE CONFORMATION  OF  EQUIPMENT  TO  PRE- 
SCRIBED SIZES  WOULD  NOT  BE  A  JUST  AND  REA- 
SONABLE RATE  FOR  SERVICE  AFTER  SUCH  CON- 
FORMATION WAS  MADE. 

]Mr.  Wettlixg  testified  on  crossTexamination  as  follows: 

Question  (by  Mr.  Stewart).  If  the  commission  fixes  a 
rate  based  upon  your  statistics  it  will  be  a  rate  for  a 
60-foot  car  on  the  basis  of  a  70-foot  car  operated  ? 

Answer.  For  a  small  proportion  of  it,  yes. 

Question.  Well,  I  am  taking  it  as  an  example. 

Answer.  Well,  that  is  only  5  per  cent  of  the  whole. 
You  want  to  remember  that. 

Question.  I  think  it  might  have  its  effect.  However 
that  may  be,  it  is  an  example  that  illustrates  the  rule. 

Answer.  Very  well.  If  it  is  merely  an  example,  I  am 
willing  to  answer  the  question. 

Question.  Now,  I  understood  you  to  say  that  the  com- 
mission having  fixed,  if  it  should  fix,  a  rate  based  upon 
your  figures  of  70  feet,  and  the  company  afterwards 
makes  its  car  conform  to  the  requirements  of  law  and  the 
desire  of  the  department  for  a  60-foot  unit,  that  that  rate 
based  upon  70-foot  operation  will  be  a  fair  and  reason- 
able rate  for  the  operation  of  the  60-foot  car  unit.  You 
did  not  mean  to  say  that,  did  you  ? 

Answer.  Oh,  I  would  not  say  that,  in  that  particular 
concrete  example,  no.     Certainly  not.     (R.  1245,  1246.) 

As  to  full  railway  post-office  cars : 

Question.  Now,  the  same  may  be  said  with  reference 
to  these  cai-s  concerning  the  charging  of  this  extra  space 
of  whatever  nature  to  the  mails  as  it  relates  to  the  ques- 
tion of  fixing  the  rate  as  we  discuss  it  in  connection  with 
the  storage  car,  may  it  not  ? 

Answer.  Oh,  yes,  generally.  There  might  be  some 
little  distinction  between  the  two.  I  think  that  there 
were  some  distinctions,  but  aside  from  the  question  of 
the  acquiescence  of  the  Post  Office  Department  in  the 
building  of  these  cai-s  and  the  furnishing  of  them  and 
accepting  them,  I  don't  know  whether  it  is  even  t^he  in- 
ference that  they  would  pay  for  them  pro  rata.  Usually 
the  theory  is  the  same  as  it  is  with  the  full  storage  car, 
(R.  1253.) 


666 

THERE  SHOULD  BE  MORE  OR  LESS  AGREEMENT  BE- 
TWEEN THE  REVENUE  TO  THE  RAILROADS  FOR  CAR- 
RYING EXPRESS  AND  MAIL  IN  A  BAGGAGE  CAR. 

Ml*.  McBride  testified  on  cross-examination  as  follows: 

Question  (by  Mr.  Wood).  What  is  your  idea,  if  any,  as 
to  the  relation  that  there  should  be  between  the  revenue 
to  the  raih-oad  company  for  carrying  express  in  a  baggage 
car  and  for  carrying  storage  mail  in  a  baggage  car  ? 

Answer.  Why,  there  is  more  or  less  sameness  in  the  car- 
riage of  the  two  classes  of  service.  I  think  there  should  be 
more  or  less  agi'eement  between  the  compensation.  There 
are  certain  factors  that  enter  into  it,  however,  that  might 
modify  one  or  the  other. 

Question.  You  do  not  think 

Answer.  I  have  not  given  that  phase  particular  thought, 
and  hardly  feel  competent  to  express  a  decided  opinion. 

Question.  Well,  as  a  matter  of  fact,  the  fii'st  impression 
you  would  have  is  that  there  should  not  be  any  great  differ- 
ence; is  that  it? 

Answer.  There  should  be  more  or  less  agreement,  I  think, 
in  the  rates.     (R.  465,  466.) 

CONSIST  OF  PASSENGER  TRAINS  MADE  UP  WITH  REF- 
ERENCE TO   SPACE  NECESSARY  TO  CARRY,  ETC. 

^Ir.  WoRTHiNGTON  testified  on  cross-examination  as 
follows: 

Question  (by  Mr.  Stewart).  Is  it  not  true  that  the 
consist  of  a  passenger  train  is  made  up  largely  with  refer- 
ence to  the  space  necessary  to  transport  the  articles  and 
persons  offered  in  the  normal  course  of  business,  without 
much  change  ? 

***** 

Answer.  No;  I  would  say  the  consist  of  passenger  trains 
has  not  much  relation  to  space.  Passenger  trains  are  run 
prett}^  regularly  all  over  the  country.  The  consist,  of 
course,  varies  according  to  the  seasons,  and  the  space  fea- 
ture does  not  enter  into  the  making  up  of  the  consist  at  all. 

Question.  Well,  surely  the  space  in  the  train  necessary 
from  day  to  day  to  transport  the  passengers  and  the  arti- 
cles offered,  you  say  you  know  in  advance,  so  far  as  the 
mails  are  concerned,  is  arranged  so  as  to  take  care  of  that 
business. 

Answer.  What  I  meant  to  say  is  that  we  do  not  handle 
passenger  traffic  on  the  space  system.  That  is  what  your 
question  infers.  Of  course,  we  furnish  the  passenger  cars 
for  the  passengers  as  they  are  required.  We  furnish  the 
express  cars  to  carry  the  express,  and  we  furnish  the  mail 


667 

cars  to  carry  the  mail.  If  in  the  one  class  of  service  we 
have  a  surplus,  we  put  on  another  car,  and  sometimes  there 
is  a  lot  of  excess  waste  space  in  that  car.  (R.  1640,  1641.) 
DEAD  SPACE  SHOULD  NOT  BE  GIVEN  CONSIDERATION 
IN  FIXING  RATES  TO  THE  EXTENT  OF  100  PER  CENT. 

;Mr.  Brauer  testified  on  cross-examination  as  follows : 

Answer  (interrupting).  That  the  dead  space  ought  to 
be  taken  into  consideration,  certainly,  but  I  think  that  the 
department  ought  to  be  allowed  to  say  when  they  can  re- 
duce the  space  from  a  60  foot  to  a  30.  In  all  the  short  runs 
it  is  very  seldom  reduced.  But  assummg  that  the  Union 
Pacific  and  the  Southern  Pacific  would  be  inclined  to  run 
their  cars  through — we  run  the  storage  cars  tlirough  now — 
what  would  prevent  them  from  starting  out  with  a  60-foot 
mail  that  was  needed  out  of  Omaha,  say,  to  Grand  Island, 
and  it  does  so  happen  in  the  western  country  that  we  start 
out  with  a  full  carload,  and  by  the  time  that  we  get  out  in 
western  Kansas  or  western  Nebraska  the  mail  dribbles  out, 
and  we  w^ould  want  but  Kttle  service  going  over  the  desert. 
It  don't  look  right  to  me  that  the  department  ought  to  be 
compelled  to  pay  for  the  vdiole  business  all  the  way  across. 
Now,  that  is  my  stand.  It  is  20  per  cent,  as  you  sa.j,  of 
these  60s  that  are  changed  to  30s  en  route.  I  assume  the 
commission  will  take  that  into  consideration  and  it  will  take 
into  consideration,  as  they  do  in  the  freight  business,  the 
amount  of  space  necessarily  hauled. 

Question  (by  Mr.  Wood).  You  think  they  ought  to, 
don't  you? 

Answer.  Why,  yes.  The  proper  ratio  ought  to  be 
charged  up.     There  is  not  any  question  about  that. 

Question.  They  ought  to  take  it  into  account  in  connec- 
tion with  these  full  railway  post  office  movements  that  we 
have  been  discussing  ? 

Answer.  Yes,  on  a  general  average.  Not  as  to  individ- 
ual cases.     (R.  3554,  3555.) 

UTILITY  OF  MAIL  CAR  AS  A  REVENUE  EARNER  AS  COM- 
PARED WITH  FREIGHT  CAR. 

Mr.  Sprague,  of  the  Pennsylvania  Co.,  testified  on  cross- 
examination  as  follows: 

Question  (by  Mr.  Stewart)  .  You  spoke  of  the  long  hauls 
of  these  freight  cars  and  the  long  time  in  transit  to  empha- 
size the  specially  high  rates  for  the  service  rendered.  Now, 
during  the  time  in  which  a  freight  car  would  make  these 
long  hauls,  say,  to  the  Pacific  coast,  that  equipment  is 
employed  exclusively  and  entirely  in  that  haul,  is  it  not? 

Answer.  Yes. 


558 

Question.  And  not  available  for  any  other  purpose? 

Answer.  That  is  right. 

Question.  It  does  not  earn  any  other  revenue  for  the 
railroad  company  during  the  time  of  that  long  haul  ? 

Answer.  No. 

Question.  Now,  how  is  it  with  reference  to  the  mail  car  ? 
We  will  take  the  same  trip  to  the  Pacific.  How  many  trips 
can  that  mail  car  make  to  the  Pacific  and  back  during  the 
time  that  your  freight  car  is  making  a  trip  and  back  ? 

Answer.  I  can  not  answer,  Mr.  Stewart.     I  do  not  know. 

Question.  You  gave  the  time  on  the  freight  car.  How 
many  days  is  that  ? 

Answer.  I  said  11.  That  is,  under  normal  conditions, 
but  I  think  to-day  it  is  nearer  14. 

Question.  Is  that  one  way  ? 

Answer.  Yes,  sir. 

Question.  And  the  time  from  Chicago  to  the  Pacific 
coast  by  mail  car  is  about  65  hours,  so  that  the  utility  of 
the  mail  car  as  a  revenue  earner  bears  a  relation  to  the 
freight  car  as  the  65  hours  do  to  14  days.  Is  not  that  about 
correct  ? 

Answer.  Well,  it  would  be  very — on  the  one  trip,  you 
mean  ? 

Question.  I  am  speaking  now  of  the  mail-earning  facility 
of  these  two  types  of  equipment. 

Answer.  Yes,  sir;  I  see  now  what  you  mean.  I  think 
that  is  substantially  correct,     (R.  863,  864.) 

IN  CONSIDERING  VALUE  OF  SERVICE  BY  STORAGE  CARS 
THE  WHOLE  SERVICE  SHOULD  BE  TAKEN  ON  ITS 
GENERAL  AVERAGE  CONDITION  AND  NOT  AS  TO 
SPECIFIC  CAR  RUNS. 

Mr.  McBride  testified  on  re-direct  examination  as  follows: 
Question  (by  Mr.  Stewart).  Now,  referring  to  Exhibit 
No.  53  in  regard  to  storage  cars,  inasmuch  as  counsel  for  the 
railroads  has  asked  your  opinion  in  regard  to  the  service 
rendered  the  Government  in  these  specific  cases,  the  instances 
of  which  were  designated,  I  will  ask  your  opinion  as  to  whether 
or  not  you  think  it  is  a  fair  proposition  to  regard  the  service 
rendered  as  a  whole  rather  than  to  select  a  particular  run 
of  storage  cars  between  St.  Louis  and  Kansas  City,  and 
upon  days  when  it  happened  that  the  storage  load  'in  one 
was  1  ton  and  the  storage  load  in  another  was  9  tons. 

Answer.  I  believe  that  in  a  case  of  this  kind  we  must 
necessarily  proceed  on  averages  for  the  entire  service.  W^e 
can  not  base  any  conclusion  upon  specific  or  isolated  in- 
stances.    We  have  got  to  take  the  service  as  a  whole. 


559 

Question.  As  a  matter  of  fact,  would  a  storage  car  con- 
taining 1  ton  of  mail  be  continued  on  one  route  any  length 
of  time  ? 

Answer.  It  would  not,  and  apparently  the  mails  during 
that  particular  week  were  very  light  on  that  train.  They 
must  hare  been. 

Question.  Those  facts  being  reported  to  the  department, 
with  a  suitable  recommendation,  would  result  in  the  dis- 
continuance of  that  storage-car  movement,  would  it  not  ? 

Answer.  Unquestionably.     (R.  468,  469.) 

And  on  re-crossexamination  as  follows : 

Question  (by  Mr.  Wood)  .  Mr.  McBride,  on  this  same 
statement,  there  are  a  great  many  storage  car  routes  on 
which  the  average  load  is  not  in  excess  of  2  or  3  tons,  are 
there  not  ? 

Answer.  Well,  that  is  made  up  of  both  outward  and 
inward  movements. 

Question.  Yes;  I  understand  that. 

Answer.  And  the  outward  movement  may  have  been 
quite  heavy,  and  the  inward  movement  very  light. 

Question.  Yes? 

Answer.  In  which  case  they  are  both  paid  for,  but  it 
results  in  a  general  average  in  both  directions  of  a  com- 
paratively small  load.     (R.  469.) 

***** 

Mr.  Stewaet.  Before  we  leave  this  subject,  I  want  to 
say  that  in  this  celebrated  instance  of  the  Wabash,  of  a 
car  carrying  1  ton,  the  car  was  withdrawn  over  a  year 
ago.  It  ran  only  a  few  days  after  that  condition  arose, 
and  they  carried  it  on  because  of  a  misconnection.    (R.  472.) 

(See  also  Mr.  Gaines's  statement,  R.  p.  3231.) 

THE  TRUE  BASIS  FOR  COMPARING  SERVICE  RENDERED 
IN  STORAGE  CARS  IS  THAT  OF  THE  GROSS  WEIGHT 
AND  NOT  THE  TARE  WEIGHT  OF  LOAD. 

Mr.  McBride's  testimony  developed  by  Dr.  Lorenz's 
questions: 

Question  (by  Dr.LoRExz) .  Do  you  happen  to  know  what 
is  the  tare  weight  of  a  storage  car  ? 

Answer.  I  think  the  railroads  have  an  exhibit  to  submit 
which  gives  that. 

Mr.  VVooD.  About  50  tons,  on  the  average. 

Question  (by  Dr.  Lorenz).  That  is,  50  tons  being  the 
case  on  that  route  with  an  average  of  1  ton,  the  gross 
weight  would  then.be  51  tons,  would  it  not? 

Answer.  Yes. 


560 

Question.  And  on  the  route  on  which  the  average  was  18 
tons,  you  would  have  68  tons  gross,  so  the  greatest  possible 
width  h}'-  wliich  all  of  those  railroads  would  vary  is  51  to 
68,  and  not  as  1  to  18? 

Answer.  Yes. 

Question.  That  is  the  other  side  of  the  story.  It  is 
true,  is  it  not,  that  in  certain  sections  of  the  country,  year 
in  and  year  out,  the  average  load  would  be  very  much 
greater,  as  shown  by  Exhibit  No.  12,  than  in  other  sections 
of  the  country? 

Answer.  That  is  true.  The  average  load  in  storage  cars 
fluctuates  very  materially  in  different  sections  of  the 
country,  at  different  times  of  the  year;  but,  as  I  stated 
before,  out  of  centers  where  the  parcels  post  originates  in 
quantities,  it  wpuld  probably  be  less  than  it  would  be  out 
of  the  cities  where  second-class  mail  matter  in  quantities 
orio-inated.  And  other  conditions  would  affect  it,  too. 
(11^471,  472.) 

GROSS  TON-MILE  BASIS  PROVES  THAT  THE  ADDITIONAL 
SERVICE  RENDERED  UNDER  INCREASED  NET  LOAD 
IS  INCONSEQUENTIAL. 

Mr.  WoRTHiNGTOX  testified  on  direct  examination  as 
follows : 

I  personally  have  studied  the  possibility  of  a  gross  ton- 
mile  basis  as  applied  to  the  railway  mail,  but  that  does  not 
seem  to  fit  the  situation  any  more  than  a  pure  space  basis. 
The  reason  for  that  is  quite  apparent.  I  might  illustrate 
it  by  an  example. 

A  gross  ton-mile  basis — by  which  I  mean  some  basis 
which  would  increase  the  pay  per  car-mile  as  the  gross 
weight  of  the  car  was  increased,  according  to  its  load — 
would  not  give  hardly  any  additional  compensation  for 
increased  service.  Assume,  for  example,  the  average  load 
in  a  mail  car  according  to  the  operated  mileage  to  be  2^ 
tons.  Assume  that  might  be  doubled  by  increased  traffic 
or  through  concentration.  If  doubled  by  increased  traffic 
under  the  space  basis,  that  additional  business  would  be 
carried  without  any  compensation  to  the  carrier. 

Under  the  gross  ton-mile  basis  the  gross  weight  of  the  car 
would  be  increased  only  5  per  cent,  due  to  the  extremely 
high  ratio  of  dead  or  tare  weight  to  load,  and  the  railroad 
would  carry  100  per  cent  increase  in  traffic  in  that  case  for 
only  5  per  cent  increase  in  revenue,  such  a  basis  being 
almost  as  unfair  to  the  carriers  as  tlie  space  basis. 

I  might  illustrate  that  further  by  what  has  actually 
occurred.  The  statistics  presented  here  indicate  that 
through  contraction  of  space  since  the  space  basis  has  gone 


5G1 

into  effect,  whether  that  contraction  has  been  due  to  any 
actual  addition  to  the  load  in  the  car  or  whether  it  has 
been  due  to  transferring  n\ail  from  the  distributing  car  to 
a  storage  car,  there  has  been  the  contraction,  and  that 
contracted  space  divided  into  the  ton  mileage  produces 
an  average  load  which  is  now  about  20  per  cent  higher 
than  it  was  in  November,  1916,  when  the  space  basis  began. 
That  means,  in  other  words,  that  the  railroads  to-day, 
under  the  space  basis,  are  carrying  one-fifth  of  the  ton 
mileage  for  nothing.  Under  the  gross  ton-mile  basis  that 
20  per  cent  increase  in  average  load  would  increase  the 
gross  weight  of  the  car  only  1  per  cent,  and  under  that 
basis  we  would  receive  only  1  per  cent  additional  pay  for 
carrying  20  per  cent  more  ton  mileage.  *  *  *  (R. 
1483-1485.) 

THE  RAILROADS  PREFER  TO  CARRY  THE  MAILS,  NOT 
ALONE  AS  A  MATTER  OF  PRESTIGE,  BUT  AS  PAYING 
MORE  THAN  OUT  OF  POCKET  EXPENSE. 

Mr.  WoRTHiNGTON  testified  on  cross-exammation  as 
follows : 

Question  (by  Mr.  Stewart).  Referring  to  the  differ- 
entials that  have  been  discussed  and  the  question  put  to 
you  by  the  examiner  as  to  what  the  effect  might  be  by 
establishmg  such  a  practice,  you  stated  that  the  special 
roads,  such  as  he  mentioned,  perhaps,  could  not  be  granted 
a  differential  because  of  competition,  and  they  would  lose 
their  business.  I  think  that  is  in  substance  what  you  said, 
is  it  not  ? 

Answer.  Yes;  there  are  certain  roads.  If  you  included 
in  the  study  of  railway  operating  costs  every  road  in  the 
United  States  you  would  find,  perhaps,  it  is  higher  on  one 
road  than  on  another  road  competing  with  it,  and  I  do 
not  think  anyone  would  maintain  that  on  any  basis  of 
payment  for  any  class  of  service,  either  of  those  roads 
could  afford  to  be  put  on  a  different  payment  per  unit,  and 
that  is  true  as  to  any  class  of  service,  and  would  be  true  as 
to  the  space  basis,  'it  is  true  to-day  as  to  the  space  basis, 
because  those  two  same  roads  to-day  -may  be  carrying 
traffic,  one  of  them  with  twice  the  load  in  the  car  that  the 
other  one  has,  and  carrying  mail  for  one-half  the  per  ton- 
mile  rate,  which  is  not  equitable. 

Question.  Then,  it  must  follow,  Mr.  Worthington,  that 
this  traffic  is  well  worth  keeping,  and  the  railroads  would 
prefer  to  hold  onto  it  rather  than  to  subjiiit  to  competition 
to  produce  any  of  these  differentials  ? 

122698—19 36 


502 

Answer.  Well,  I  think  that  is  true  generall}^  with  the 
railroads,  that  they  wxnihl  prefer  to  carry  the  maW,  not 
alone  as  a  matter  of  prestijjo  but  as  nearly  every  class  of 
trallic  pays  more  than  out  of  pocket  expense  for  movement. 
I  do  not'think  it  could  be  maintained  that  the  mail  pay 
basis  should  be  upon  an  out  of  pocket  basis.  (R.  1647- 
1649.) 

THE  POST  OFFICE  DEPARTMENT  BELIEVES  THE  RAIL- 
ROAD PAY  SHOULD  BE  LESS  THAN  NOW  RECEIVED. 

During  the  direct  examination  of  Mr.  Wettling  the  fol- 
lowing statement  was  made  by  Mr.  Stew^art: 

Attorney  Examiner  Bko^vn.  *  *  *  j  thought  the 
Post  Office  Department  had  reached  the  conclusion  that, 
considering  the  cost  of  the  service  and  all  other  elements 
that  ought  to  have  been  taken  into  account,  153,000,000 
represented  their  estiiuate  of  the  cost  of  the  service, 
together  with  the  profit  to  the  carrier  for  rendering  that 
service ;  is  that  right  ? 

The  Witness.  Yes;  that  is  about  right. 

Mr.  Stew^vht.  It  is  not  just  right.  We  have  submitted 
oui'  exhibits  showing  the  revenue  received  by  the  railroad 
company  for  the  performance  of  service  during  the  statis- 
tical period  and  during  the  year  represented  by  the  sta- 
tistical period.  The  aggregate  for  that  would  approximate 
the  amount  that  you  mention.  Now,  as  to  whether  or 
not  that  is  the  proper  rate  we  have  not  expressed  any 
opinion,  excepting  in  our  exhibits,  where  we  have  shown 
that  we  think  they  should  have  been  paid  very  much  less 
than  that. 

***** 

Mr.  Stewart.  The  Post  Office  Department  has  sub- 
mitted a  number  of  exhibits  which  contain  upon  their 
faces  various  amounts  com.puted  upon  various  hypotheses, 
which  it  believes  will  be  a  fair  compensation  to  the  railroad 
for  carrying  the  mails.     (R.  1027,  1028.) 

ABNORMAL  SITUATION  AS  SHOWN  BY  THE  RAILROADS' 
EXHIBITS. 

Mr.  WoRTHiNGTON  testified  on  direct  examination  as 
follows : 

The  freight  revenues  have  increased  35  per  cent  in  1918, 
compared  with  1916. 

The  total  revenues  have  increased  37  per  cent. 

The  total  operating  expenses,  as  I  have  just  stated,  in- 
creased 70  per  cent,  being  almost  double  the  amount  in 
1918  that  they  were  in  1916. 


Now,  I  think  that  that  is  an  astounding  statement. 
You  will  observe  that  our  operating  expenses  for  1918,  of 
course,  for  the  first  time  in  railway  history  are  above 
$4,000,000,000.  In  1916,  only  two  years  previous  to  that 
time,  they  were  only  S2, 357,000,000.  The  net  operating- 
revenues  of  the  carriers  declined,  due  to  the  very  exces- 
sive increase  in  operating  expenses,  from  $1,239,000,000 
in  1916  to  $906,000,000  in  1918,  a  reduction  of  27  per 
cent  in  the  aggregate  net  operating  revenue.     (R.  1393.) 

PARCEL  POST  IS  DIRECTLY  COMPETITIVE  WITH  EX- 
PRESS. 

Mr.  WoRTHiNGTON  testified  on  direct  examination  as 
follows: 

Question  (by  ]VIi\  Wood).  Now,  that  parcel  post,  if  it 
represents  60  per  cent,  or  whatever  per  cent  it  represents 
of  the  total  mail,  is  directly  competitive  mth  the  express 
and  the  less  than  carload  freight  ? 

Answer.  It  is  directly  competitive  with  both  express 
and  freight.     (R.  1407.) 

RAILROAD  COMPARISON  OF  CAR-MILE  RATES  FOR  EX- 
PRESS WITH  MAIL— MR.  WORTHINGTON 'S  FIGURES 
FOR  MAIL  BASED  ON  AUTHORIZED  AND  ALL  UNAU- 
THORIZED AND  UNUSED  SPACE. 

Mr.  WoRTHiNGTON  testified  on  cross-examination  as 
f  oUows : 

Question  (by  Mr.  Stewart).  In  your  comparisons  be- 
tween express  and  mail  on  the  car-mile  basis,  the  figures 
you  have  used  were  produced  by  adding  to  the  mails  aU 
the  unauthorized  and  excess  space  and  operation  reported 
in  connection  with  the  mails  by  the  companies  ? 

Answer.  I  used  the  operated  space  as  shown  by  the  ex- 
hibits of  the  carriers.     (R.  1612.) 

MR.  WORTHINGTON' S  FIGURES  ON  MERCHANDISE 
FREIGHT. 

Mr.  WoRTHiNGTON  testified  on  cross-examination  as 
f  oUows : 

Question  (by  Mr.  Stewart).  ^Ir.  Worthington,  refer- 
ring again  to  the  question  of  authorizing  this  space,  we 
do  not  seem  to  agree  upon  what  you  intend  to  say  would 
be  the  rule.  You  said,  I  believe,  that  the  department 
would  be  expected  to  authorize  the  space  which  would 
be  necessarily  operated,  but  that  leaves  in  controversy, 
does  it  not,  all  of  this  space  that  we  have  been  talking 
about  ? 


6G4 

Answer.  I  do  not  think  any  space  could  be  left  in  con- 
trovoi-sy,  and  I  hope  it  will  not  be.  Our  plan  proposed  was 
to  afford  some  protection  against  any  injustice  by  the  appli- 
cation of  the  rule  of  adjusting  space  at  some  point  wiiere 
it  was  physically  impossible  for  the  railroad  to  change  a  car. 
That  is  what  was  contemplated. 

Question.  You  would  think,  then,  that  that  would  be 
tlie  governing  consideration,  where  it  was  physically  im- 
possn)le  to  change  the  consist  of  the  train  ? 

Answer.  That  was  all,  Mr.  Stewart. 

***** 

Question.  As  to  the  merchandise  freight,  do  I  under- 
stand you  to  say  that  you  base  your  conclusion  upon  the 
exhibits  of  Messrs.  Sprague,  Mahoney,  and  Goodwjm  ? 

Answer.  Well,  that  is  a  different  thing.  We  based  our 
conclusion  as  to  what  rate  woidd  be  a  proper  rate 

Question.  That  is  what  we  are  inquiring  of. 

Answer  (continuing).  Upon  the  exhibits  presented  as 
to  the  revenues  from  freight  service,  and  also  as  to  compari- 
sons made  with  the  express  rates.     (R.  1687,  1688.) 

THE  RAILROADS'  STATISTICS  OF  COMPARISON  BETWEEN 
REVENUE  FROM  MAILS  AND  EXPRESS  (EXHIBIT  NO. 
15)  DO  NOT  REPRESENT  ACTUAL  OR  AVERAGE 
CONDITIONS  OF  SERVICE. 

Mr.  Wettling  testified  on  cross-examination  as  follows: 

Question  (by  Mr.  Stewart).  *  *  *  That  brmgs  us  to 
Exhibit  No.  15.  Now,  I  presume,  Mr.  Wettling,  that  it 
might  be  said  very  fairly  that  these  exhibits  woidd  be  per- 
suasive m  so  far  as  they  represented  actual  conditions  of 
the  service  ? 

Answer.  Well,  I  hope  they  are,  in  so  far  as  they  repre- 
sent what  we  have  shown  m  them.  I  do  not  claim  for 
them  that  they  represent  the  mail  service  on  the  general 
average.  Of  course,  I  can  not  hope  to  do  that.  I  was 
making  comparison  particularly  with  parcel  post  in  this 
case. 

Question.  As  a  matter  of  fact,  you  do  not  know  that 
they  do  represent  average  conditions  in  the  mail  service 
at  all,  do  you  ? 

Answer.  No;  yet  what  they  show,  when  you  compare 
them  with  the  average  weights  as  shown  m  your  exhibit. 
Aside  from  that  they  would  not  determine  the  average 
service,  as  a  whole. 

Question.  For  instance,  if  it  were  true  that  the  mails 
are  not  carried — that  parcel  post  mails,  for  mstance,  with 
which  comparisons  are  made,  are  not  carried  in  such  units 


565 

as  hare  been  selected  for  comparison  in  the  weight  or 
manner  described  here,  your  comparisons  with  express  in 
the  same  miit  would  hardly  hold  good  as  a  general  propo- 
sition, as  an  average? 

Answer.  Oh,  I  thhik  that  that  is  stating  it  a  little  too 
strong.  I  thmk — unless  I  am  mistaken  as  to  this  assump- 
tion— that  parcel  post  generally  will  be  carried  in  part  in 
closed-pouch  units  and  largely  in  storage  units  and  in 
storage  space. 

Question.  I  think  you  are  ri^ht  about  it  when  you  qual- 
ify it  by  the  use  of  the  word  '^partly."  Now,  your  exam- 
ples are  predicated  also  upon  the  theory  that  the  imits 
are  loaded  to  the  maximum  and  your  comparisons  are 
made  with  maximum  quantities  stacked  up  at  Sears,  Roe- 
buck &  Co.'s  headquarters  of  this  kmd  of  merchandise 
which  was  used  as  your  example  ? 

Answer.  Yes,  sir;  that  figures  the  complete  full  space, 
filled  up  solid. 

Question.  So  that  if  there  was  any  comparison  at  all  it 
would  api3ly  only  where  those  conditions  exist  in  the 
service  ? 

Answer.  Well,  it  would  do  this,  Mr.  Stewart:  Assuming 
now  that  the  question  that  your  last  question  leads  to, 
that  instead  of  using  one  miit  of  space  to  carry  1,470 
pounds,  let  us  sa^',  of  parcel  post  in  accordance  with  the 
last  test,  we  used  two  units  of  space,  we  would  not  only 
double  the  pay,  but  we  would  also  be  furnishing  double 
the  space  in  which  to  do  it,  hi  which,  if  the  traffic  had 
been  offered,  we  might  have  earned  twice  as  much  money. 
I  think  the  comparison  still  holds  good  for  that  reason, 
regardless  of  the  fact  that  largely  the  average  weight 
carried  in  the  mail  may  not  have  been  as  great.  That  is 
to  our  disadvantage. 

Question.  And  it  would  be  also  true  that  in  order  to  get 
a  fair  comparison  no  more  express  matter  should  be  con- 
sidered than  would  correspond  to  the  amount  of  mail 
carried  in  such  units. 

Answer.  No;  I  don't  agree  with  you  m  that.  I  feel 
that  we  ought  to  be  able  to  realize  the  fullest  amount  of 
pay  that  is  possible  to  derive  from  a  combination  of  the 
weight  together  with  the  limitations  placed  upon  the 
weight  by  the  space  that  it  occupies.  It  is  no  advantage 
to  us  to  pull  a  car  that  is  very  lightly  loaded,  even  though 
we  may  get  a  good  rate  for  it,  if  we  can  get  that  car  with 
a  heavier  load  and  get  still  more,  through  a  smaller  rate, 
possiblv. 

Question.  That  is  an  economic  proposition  which  we 
could  all  subscribe  to,  but  I  am  talking  about  actual  con- 
ditions in  the  service,  and  you  are  making  a  comparison 


5GG 

here  ])otwoen  the  revenue  which  .you  say  you  would  receive 
for  oxj)rcss  with  the  revenue  you  would  receive  for  a  mail 
unit? 

Answer.  Well,  that  is  the  ultimate  thing  we  are  after, 
always — the  money — you  know. 

Question.  Yes,  and  therefore  you  must  ascertain  what 
you  would  normally  and  on  the  average  receive  from 
express  hi  such  a  unit,  and,  as  a  matter  of  fact,  you  never 
carry  exj^ress  in  that  way  in  these  units  ? 

Aiiswer,  No;  we  do  not.  I  will  acknowledge  that,  of 
course,  naturally.  We,  however,  do  this,  Mr.  Stewart. 
Every  time  we  carry  a  pound  or  another  pound  or  an  addi- 
tional ])ound  for  the  express,  we  get  a  share  of  the  gross 
revenue  of  that  particular  package  of  that  particular  weight. 
Now,  of  course,  it  helps  out  if  they  can  load  heavily.  The 
more  heavily  they  load  the  more  money  we  get.  That  is 
the  ultimate  object  of  railroad  operation. 

Question.  I  agree  that  that  would  be  ideal,  but  it  does 
not  exist  in  the  service. 

Answer.  You  show  in  your  exhibit,  for  instance,  that 
the  average  load  per  foot  is  practically  double  what  the 
average  load  of  mail  is,  don't  you? 

Question.  Yes;  it  is. 

Answer.  That  helps  us  some. 

Question.  Now,  you  have  used  in  these  exhibits  a  weight 
of  874  pounds  and  also  a  weight  of  1,470  pounds  of  express 
to  a  3-ioot  closed-pouch  unit,  and  you  have  described  how 
those  have  been  obtained.  For  instance,  by  piling  up 
these  articles  in  a  bin  constructed  of  certain  dimensions, 
at  the  headquartere  of  Sears,  Roebuck  &  Co.  Now,  taking 
the  lowest  weight  you  use,  874  pounds,  it  seems  to  me  that 
the  main  value  of  these  statistics  depends  largely  upon 
whether  that  represents  anything  real  in  the  service.  Is 
that  not  true  ? 

Answer.  Well,  naturally,  yes. 

Question.  Now,  on  page  8  of  your  exhibit,  the  874  pounds 
is  produced  from  74  packages. 

Answer,  Yes,  sir. 

Question.  And  I  assume  that  you— of  courseitis  evident 
that  you  took  that  as  the  average  weight  ? 

Answer.  And  projected  that  to  each  one  of  the  various 
points  from  each  one  of  the  various  points  of  origin,  as  set 
out  there.  That  is  all  an  assumption  as  to  movement  from 
the  different  points  to  the  different  points,  and  as  to  the 
facts  that  such  mail  might  move  from  those  places. 

Question.  Now,  that  woidd  be  very  good  if  you  did  not 
have  some  other  figures  on  weight  in  these  exhibits,  but  on 
page  9  instead  of  an  average  for  73  packages  you  had  an 


667 

average  for  a  million  and  a  half  packages,  and  on  that  ex- 
hibit it  is  sho^\-n  that  the  average  weight  of  the  sack  is 
33.86  pounds  and  that  the  average  number  of  sacks  to  a 
3-foot  imit  was  17.9,  making  a  weight  of  590.7  pounds  in- 
stead of  874. 

Answer.  That  is  true. 

Question.  But  you  took  the  larger  weight  based  upon  less 
experience. 

Answer.  Well,  but  don't  vou  see  we  have  to  give  up  that 
full  amount  of  space  in  the  car  to  furnish  it  ?  We  would 
infinitelv  prefer  to  have  had  the  same  amount  of  space 
carry  greater  weight  if  we  were  getting  paid  for  the  weight. 

Question.  That  is  to  say,  you  took  the  most  favorable 
showing  that  could  be  made  for  the  railroads  'i 

Answer.  I  did  not.  I  took  the  sho%dng  just  exactly  as 
it  developed  bv  the  test. 

Question.  But  you  had  statistics  showing  a  less  weight? 

Answer.  For  mail? 

Question.  Well,  for  mail. 

Answer.  For  mail,  ves,  sir. 

Question.  Is  not  that  what  you  ought  to  compare  this 
\v'ith  if  it  is  going  to  be  carried  in  a  mail  unit? 

Answer.  I  was  making  comparison  of  what  we  were  able 
to  get  and  what  revenue  we  were  able  to  get  from  the  same 
comparative  space  when  loaded  by  mail  and  when  loaded 
by  express.  When  loaded  by  express  within  the  same 
space  the  revenue  to  the  railroad  would  have  been  as 
shown,  but  when  loaded  bv  mail  it  didn't  make  any  differ- 
ence whether  you  had  50  pounds  or  2,000  pounds  in  that 
same  space;  we  didn't  get  a  penny  more  for  it. 

Question^  Are  you  familiar  with  the  Post  Office  Depart- 
ment Exhibit  No.  55  in  a  general  way,  showing  the  maxi- 
mum and  minimum  number  of  sacks  carried  in  3-foot  units  ? 

Answer.  No,  sir;  I  have  not  had  time  to  investigate  it. 
I  know  that  there  is  such  an  exhibit,  but  I  have  not  looked 
it  over. 

Question.  Now,  taking  the  mean  of  an  average  ol  the 
maximum  number  of  sacks  shown  there  as  carried  in  a 
3-foot  unit  and  the  average  of  the  minimum  number  of 
sacks  carried  in  the  same  kind  of  unit  produces  an  average 
of  11.82  sacks  to  the  3-foot  unit,  closed  pouch? 

Answer.  Is  that  an  arithmetical  or  weighted  average, 
Mr.  Stewart?  • 

Question.  That  is  the  actual  count  in  those  units.  There 
is  no  weight  attached  to  that.     This  is  the  count  of  sacks. 

Answer.  I  mean  is  it  the  weighted  average  or  the  arith- 
metical average  ?  Do  you  just  merely  foot  them  all  up 
and  divide  by  the  total  number? 


568 

Question.  No;  I  think  not.  I  did  not  make  the  computa- 
tion, but  the  computation  was  handed  to  me. 

Answer.  Well,  hi  any  event,  I  don't  know  anything 
about  it.  I  didn't  investio;ate  it.  I  have  not  investigated 
any  specific  instances  or  have  not  understood  from  any  of 
the  operating  men  with  whom  I  have  spoken  that  the 
average  would  run  like  that.  If  that  were  the  case,  I  can 
see  veiy  little  chance  for  all  this  emergency  space  or  excess 
units. 

Question.  That  happened  to  be  the  case,  and  it  has  been 
surprising  to  many.  Now,  multiplying  this  average  of 
11.82  sacks  by  the  average  weight  shown  on  your  exhibit, 
page  9,  for  the  month  of  June,  1918,  33.86  pounds,  which 
seems  to  be  about  an  average  for  those  months  given  there, 
neither  the  highest  nor  the  lowest,  produces  400.22  pounds 
instead  of  870  pounds,  which  you  used  in  your  estimate. 
***** 

It  is  less  than  half  what  you  used,  and  that  represents 
actual  experience  in  the  service.  Now,  what  have  you  to 
say  as  to  that  1 

Answer.  Well,  I  have  to  say  to  that,  that  if  that  was  the 
kind  of  traffic  that  was  handed  us  by  the  express  com- 
panies we  would  be  very  unfortunate.  Happily,  they  give 
us  better  weights  and  therefore  better  revenue. 

Question.  But  you  are  not  prepared  to  say  that  you 
could  carry  more  than  400  pounds  in  the  same  space  in  a 
closed-pouch  unit  ? 

Answer.  By  express  ? 

Question.  By  express. 

Ansvrer.  Yes,  I  think  we  do,  because  your  own  exhibit 
develops  the  fact  that  the  average  weight  for — I  forget 
what  unit  was  used — is  double  in  the  express  what  it  is  in 
the  mail.     I  am  not  surprised  to  find  that. 

Question.  Well,  now,  out  of  Chicago  is  it  not  true  that 
Sears,  Roebuck  &  Co.'s  parcel-post  matter  does  not 
travel  in  these  units  at  all;  it  travels  out  in  full  cars? 

Answer.  Largely  so. 

Question.  Express  cars  ? 

Answer.  That  does  not  help  us  very  much,  though. 

Mr.  Wood.  Am  I  correct,  Mr.  Stewart,  in  assuming  that 
this  Exhibit  No.  55,  to  which  you  have  referred  in  this 
examination  of  the  witness,  is  not  a  statement  of  the 
number  of  sacks  or. outside  packages  in  parcel  post,  but  is 
a  statement  of  the  number  of  sacks  and  packages  of  mail 
matter  of  all  kinds?     Am  I  correct  in  that  assumption? 

Mr.  Stewart.  This  statement  I  think  fully  describes 
itself  and  answers  your  question  at  tlic  heading.     It  says 


the  number  of  sacks  in  car  at  any  one  time,  maxinium  and 
minimum,  also  gives  emergency  authorization  in  some 
cases. 

Mr.  Wood.  But  that  is  all  kinds  of  mad.  I  understood 
your  question  to  the  witness  to  carry  the  idea  or  assump- 
tion that  it  was  parcel  post. 

Mr.  Stewart.  No:  t^iis  was  all  kinds  of  mail. 

The  Witness.  Of  course,  our  comparison,  ]\Ir.  Stewart, 
did  not  pretend  to  make  a  comparison  with  the  mail 
generall)^  It  made  comparison  with  the  parcel  post, 
and  even  as  to  parcel  post,  only  that  which  moved  out  of 
Chicago.  We  realize  that  it  would  not  be  the  same  all 
over  the  country,  from  other  points. 

Question  (by "Mr.  Stewart).  That  is,  you  took  specific 
cases  for  these  illustrations  ? 

Answer.  Well,  you  might  call  it  a  specific  case,  but  as  I 
described  it,  it  was  taking  the  average  as  it  ran.  I  have 
not  any  doubt  whatever  that  if  10  tests  had  been  made 
instead"^  of  one  the  difference  would  have  been  but  very 
little  one  wav  or  the  other,  and  it  might  have  been  either 
way.     (R.  1339-1348.) 

EMPTY  RETURN  MOVEMENT  IN  FREIGHT  CARS  NOT 
TAKEN  INTO  CONSIDERATION  IN  EXHIBITS  OF 
SPRAGUE  COMPARING  FREIGHT  AND  MAIL  REVE- 
NUE. 

Mr.  Sprague  testified  on  cross-examination  as  follows: 

Question  (by  Mr.  Stewart).  *  *  *  Now,  all  of  the 
statistics  that  you  have  given  here  for  freight  are  on  the 
basis  of  the  one-way  movement.     That  is  correct,  is  it  not  ? 

Answer.  Yes,  sir. 

Question.  And  you  have  not  taken  into  consideration 
at  all  the  empty  movement  in  the  return  direction? 

Answer.  No.  I  want  to  say  in  connection  with  that 
matter  that  I  had  no  intention  to  evacle  that  in  the  ex- 
hibit I  presented,  or  to  obscure  it  in  any  way,  but  the 
question  confronted  me  as  to  what  return  mileage  I 
should  compare  it  with.  Now,  we,  of  course,  have  a  total 
car  mileage,  loaded  and  empty,  and  you  can  get  a  relation- 
ship by  comparing  those  two  mileages.  I  did  not  consider 
that  such  a  relationship  would  be  proper.  In  fact,  I 
considered  it  would  be  quite  ridiculous,  for  the  following 
reasons:  First,  included  in  that  total  of  empty  mileage, 
you  liave  your  coal  cars,  tank  cars,  stock  cars,  poultry 
cars,  and  many  other  cars,  where  the  empty  movement  is 
100  per  cent,  and  they,  to  my  mind,  atford  no  basis  for 
comparison  with  the  mail  traffic. 


570 

In  the  second  place,  it  occurred  to  me  that  the  carload 
tralhc  was  not  fairly  comparable  with  the  mail  traffic. 
"\Mion  a  man  empties  an  empty  car  he  loads  it  and  he 
unloads  it. 

In  the  third  place,  you  have  in  your  hands  more  or  less 
the  regulation  of  that  empty  car  or  loaded  car  movement 
in  the  mail  traffic,  and  in  the  freight  traffic  we  do  not. 
We  have  to  send  a  car  wherever  it  is  ordered,  to  the  point 
where  it  is  ordered,  and  that  struck  me  as  constituting  a 
very  good  reason  why  it  would  not  be  proper  to  make 
that  comparison. 

The  fourth  reason  is  that  the  only  traffic  that  I  could 
compare  the  mail  traffic  with  fairly  was  the  merchandise 
traffic,  and  there  is  no  way  that  I  know  of  that  we  could 
get  the  empty  haul  of  the  merchandise  cars. 

What  I  stated  was  that,  in  a  general  way,  so  far  as  the 
large  cities  are  concerned,  we  have,  I  think,  a  fairly  bal- 
anced traffic.  I  would  not  expect  to  find  much  empty  car 
mileage.  It  is  true  that  we  do  not  haul  a  car  of  merchan- 
dise from  New  York  to  Philadelphia,  and  then  haul  the 
empty  car  back  to  New  York. 

Question.  How  about  this  movement  on  Exhibit  38  to 
the  Pacific  coast?  Let  us  take  these  cars.  Your  figures 
there  are  100  per  cent  movement  both  ways.  Do  these 
cars  come  back  filled  from  the  Pacific  coast? 

i^swer.  I  don't  know. 

Question.  With  merchandise  of  this  character? 

Answer.  I  don't  know.     I  don't  think  they  do. 

Question.  So  that  in  that  case  especially  these  figures  of 
2.1  cents  per  ton-mile  might  fairly  be  reduced  by  that 
ratio,  or  w^hatever  it  might  be  ? 

Answer.  So  far  as  the  return  haul  is  concerned. 

Question.  Now,  how  about  the  mail  cars  coming  back 
from  the  Pacific  coast?  They  are  paid  for,  are  they  not, 
always  ? 

Answer.  I  understand  so.     I  am  not  positive. 

Question.  So  that  the  railroad  companies  receive  a  hun- 
dred per  cent  in  both  directions  on  the  mail  movement  to 
the  Pacific  coast.     (R.  864-867.) 

NO  CONCLUSION  FORMED  AS  TO  THE  RELATION  OF  THE 
EXPRESS  TO  MERCHANDISE  CAR  SERVICE. 

Mr.  Sprague  testified  on  cross-examination  as  foUow^s: 

Question  (by  Mr.  Stewart).  What  is  your  idea  of  the 
express  service  with  reference  to  the  railroad  service,  if  you 
have  any? 

Answer.  I  have  none. 
.   Question.  You  have  none? 

Answer.  No,  sir. 


I 


I 


571 

Question.  You  have  formed  no  conclusions  at  all  as  to 
the  relation  of  the  express  service,  so  far  as  the  subject 
matter  handled  is  concerned,  with  this  merchandise  car 
service  ? 

Answer.  No,  sir. 

Question.  Handled  b}^  freight  ? 

Answer.  No,  sir. 

Question.  And  you  do  not  know  that  the  subject  matter 
in  the  two  is  about  the  same  ? 

Answer.  No,  sir.  I  know  the  express  rates  are  higher 
than  the  freight  rates. 

Question.  I  am  not  speakmg  of  rates.  I  am  speakmg  of 
the  subject  matter  handled,  the  character  of  stuff. 

Answer.  Oh,  you  mean  the  movement  of  express  by 
passenger  train  and  in  freight  service?  Is  that  the  com- 
parison ? 

Question.  Yes. 

Mr.  Wood.  You  are  comparing  the  express  and  mail,  are 
you  not  ? 

Mr.  Stewart,  No;  I  am  comparing  the  express  with  this 
merchandise. 

The  Witness.  Well,  there  is  that  difference  in  service, 
of  course. 

Question  (by  Mr.  Stewart).  I  am  not  speaking  of  serv- 
ice. I  am  speaking  of  the  character  of  the  articles.  In 
other  words,  is  it  not  true  that  the  express  service  is  prac- 
tically an  auxiliar}"  raih'oad  service  growing  out  of  the 
translfer  of  this  merchandise  stuff  from  one  method  of 
handling  to  another  method  of  handling  ? 

Answer.  That  varies  to  some  extent;  yes. 

Question.  "\Miat  would  you  think  of  a  comparison  be- 
tween the  revenues  derived  by  the  railroad  companies  for 
the  carrying  of  express  matter  and  the  revenues  derived 
by  them"  from  carrj^mg  the  mails  ?  Do  you  think  it  would 
be  a  fair  comparison  ? 

Answer.  I  don't  know. 

Question.  And  yet  you  think  these  commodities  are 
practically  alike;  I  mean  the  commodities  of  merchandise, 
freight,  'and  express  ? 

Answer.  That  would  not  necessarily  follow.  They  may 
be  aUke,  and  still  the  comparison  m  revenues  might  be  a 
different  conclusion.     (R.  874-876.) 


r,72 

NO   CONCLUSION  ON  COMPARISON  OF  RATES  FOR  MER- 
CHANDISE FREIGHT  AND  MAIL. 

Mr.  Sprague  testified  on  cross-examination  as  follows: 

Question  (by  Mr.  Stewart).  Do  1  understand  that  you 
have  reached  those  conclusions  and  do  not  wish  to  express 
any  conclusion  with  reference  to  a  comparison  of  these  rates 
on  merchandise  freight  and  the  rates  received  by  the  com- 
panies for  carrying  the  mails;  is  that  correct? 

Answer.  Do  you  mean  between  the  merchandise  and 
mail? 

Question.  Yes. 

Answer.  I  have  not  drawn  any  comparison  in  detail 
between  the  merchandise  and  the  mail. 

Question.  And  you  have  no 

Answer.  I  have  simply  presented  the  statistics  here 
with  respect  to  merchandise  traffic,  supplemented  to  some 
extent,  so  far  as  the  mail  traffic  is  concerned,  by  the  general 
questions  asked  me  by  counsel;  but  I  do  not  intend  by 
that  to  draw  any  specific  deductions  from  these  exhibits. 

Question.  And  you  have  no  opinion  of  your  own  upon 
that  point  ? 

Answer.  I  have  not,  except  that,  as  I  have  said,  the 
revenue  from  the  mail  service  is  less  than  on  the  same 
articles  moving  in  freight  service,  as  shown  by  these 
exhibits. 

Question.  These  specific  instances  ? 

Answer.  Yes. 

Question.  You  are  a  freight  man,  are  you  not  ? 

Answer.  Yes,  sir. 

Question.  And  you  have  devoted  practically  all  of  your 
attention  to  that  line  of  work  ? 

Answer.  Yes,  sir. 

Question.  I  think  you  said  that  the  railroads  and  the 
mails  were  in  competition  with  reference  to  the  transpor- 
tation of  magazines  and  ncAvspapers;  is  that  correct? 

Answer.  Well,  I 

Question.  Some  competition  there  ? 

Answer.  I  would  say  to  some  extent.  I  am  not  familiar 
with  the  extent  to  which  you  move  magazines  by  mail. 
I  know  that  you  can  move  them  either  way. 

Question.  Well,  you  know  that  the  magazine  normally 
goes  into  the  mails  at  so  much  per  pound  or  weight 
prescribed  by  the  statute,  and  postage  paid;  that  is  to  say, 
it  goes  into  the  Post  Office  Department,  and  then  the 
transportation  is  effected  by  the  railroads;  wherever  it  is 
so  carried,  it  is  handed  over  to  them  as  mail.  Of  course, 
everybody  is  familiar  with  that.     Now,  you  think  that 


5T3 

sometimes  the  railroads  carry  magazines  independently, 
where  the  publisher  does  not  allow  the  Postal  Service  to 
intervene;  newspapers  are  sometimes  carried  that  way? 

Answer.  No,  sir;  I  do  not  intend  anything  of  the  kind 
by  the  exhibit.  That  is  too  intricate  for  me  to  handle. 
I  simply  made  a  comparison  of  the  rates  on  magazines  in 
freight  service 

Question.  Yes;  I  am  not  speaking  of  your  exhibit.  I 
am  speaking  of  your  testimony,  from  which  I  understood 
you  said  that  there  was  competition  between  the  mails 
and  the  railroads  with  reference  to  that  sort  of  commodity. 

Answer.  The  only  thing  I  meant  by  the  answer  was  that 
at  Philadelphia  the  magazines  could  be  moved,  as  I  under- 
stand it,  in  postal  cars,  and  I  know  that  they  can  be  moved 
by  freight. 

Question  (by  Mr.  Wood)  .  They  are  moved  by  freight. 

Answer.  And  are  moved  by  freight. 

Question  (by  Mr.  Stewart)  .  Under  certain  conditions  ? 

Answer.  I  don't  know  that. 

Question.  And  where  they  are  moved  by  freight,  it  is 
upon  the  initiative  of  the  department,  is  it  not? 

Answer.  I  presume  you  control  the  method  of  transpor- 
tation, as  the  consignor. 

Question.  Now,  if  there  is  any  competition  with  regard 
to  the  matter,  does  not  the  competition  come  from  the 
railroad  company,  and  not  from  the  department,  inasmuch 
as  it  is  the  primary  function  of  the  department  to  transport 
these  things  ? 

Answer.  From  the  answer  I  have  made,  it  is  obvious 
that  I  have  used  the  word  "competition"  in  a  rather 
unfortunate  sense;  that  is  all.     (R.  876-879.) 

THE  RAILROADS'  7  PER  CENT  RETURN  ON  PROPERTY  IS 
BASED  UPON  MERE  OPINION  WHICH  DOES  NOT  AC- 
CORD WITH  ANY  RETURN  EVER  RECEIVED. 

Mr.  Wettling  testified  on  cross-examination  as  follows: 

Question  (by  Mr.. Stewart).  I  see  you  have  here  charged 
7  per  cent  return  on  investment? 

Answer.  Yes,  sir. 

Question.  What  is  the  reason  for  that? 

Answer.  Well,  I  have  always  felt  that  a  7  per  cent  return 
for  a  business  like  the  railroad  business  was  not  too  much, 
and  in  the  last  three  or  four  years  the  railroads  have  moneys 
that  they  have  been  obliged  to  borrow.  Many  of  them 
have  been  unable  to  finance  their  Jieeds  with  bonds,  as  they 
had  in  the  past,  but  have  been  obliged  to  borrow  from  hand 
to  mouth,  different  kinds  of  notes,  running  six  months  or 


574 

a  year  or  three  or  four  or  even  as  much  as  five  years,  a 
tiling  unheard  of  in  the  past;  that  is,  back  of  1907  and  1908. 
They  liave  been  paying  all  the  way  from  what  wonld  amount 
to,  in  the  net,  after  necessary  banking  commissions  have 
been  paid  and  discounts,  all  the  way  from  5h  per  cent  to 
over  S  per  cent. 

Question.  Well,  your  idea  is  that  they  never  were  prop- 
erly ]iaid,  and  you  think  the  7  per  cent  would  pay  them? 

Answer.  I  think  7  per  cent  would  be  a  fair  return  under 
all  conditions,  j^ear  in  and  year  out,  over  a  general  average 
period,  and  I  feel  that  they  have  never  been  paid  suffi- 
ciently well. 

Question.  Tlierefore  that  is  not  based  upon  anything 
they  ever  did  receive  ? 

Answer.  No,  sir.     Oh,  no,  no.     I  don't  pretend  that. 

Question.  A  supposititious  rate  ? 

Answer.  No,  not  very  supposititious.  It  is  an  opinion 
of  mine.  I  don't  know  what  it  is  worth,  I  have  always 
maintained  in  any  rate  cases  that  I  have  had  anything  to 
do  with  or  for  which  I  have  produced  figures  that  7  per 
cent  was  a  reasonable  rate  of  return,  and  we  ought  to  again 
do  it.  We  hope  some  day  to  reach  that  position.  (R. 
1327,  1328.) 

THE  APPLICATION  TO  THE  EXPRESS  OF  THE  SAME  PRO- 
CESSES OF  BUILDING  A  RATE  FOR  MAILS  WHICH 
HAVE  BEEN  FOLLOWED  BY  THE  RAILROADS. 

Mr.  Wettling  testified  on  cross-examination  as  follows : 

Question  (by  Mr.  Stewart).  Mr.  Wettling,  we  were  ex- 
amining your  railroad  Exhibit  No.  4,  on  the  left-hand  side 
of  this  sheet — and  that  is  all  I  am  referring  to,  as  it  coincides 
with  the  statistical  period.  Your  conclusion  is  that  on  this 
basis  and  theory  the  railroads  should  receive  something 
like  $93,000,000  for  the  mail  service? 

Answer.  Call  it  ninety-four. 

Question.  Ninety-four  million.  I  don' t  understand  that 
you  make  any  distinction  between  payment  on  the  weight 
basis  and  payment  on  the  space  basis  with  respect  to  this 
exhibit  here,  do  you  ? 

Answer.  No,  sir. 

Question.  So  that  your  conclusion  would  be  just  the 
same  in  either  case  ? 

.Ajiswer.  Why,  naturally,  Mr.  Stewart.  What  I  was 
doing  here  was  to  take  the  basis  as  determined  by  me  in 
the  statistical  ])eriod  and  applying  the  cost  and  the  7  pei 
cent  return  and  the  necessary  empty  car-foot  mileage,  as 
I  have  placed  it,  and  that  if  we  were  paid  an  adequate  re- 


575 

turn  on  the  space  basis  and  on  the  car-miles  operated  to 
comply  with  the  authorizations  as  based  on  March  27, 
1917,  then  to  perform  that  service  it  was  my  conclusion 
that  it  would  require  this  round  figure  of  $94,000,000. 

Question  (b}^  Attorney  Examiner  Brown).  That  was 
without  any  division  of"^the  units  of  that  service  into  a 
particular  charge  ? 

Answer.  This  is  without  any  division.  It  is  just  the 
general  average  that  we  should  receive,  without  attempting 
to  differentiate  between  the  units  or  to  graduate  it  between 
the  various  units  or  between  roads  or  anything  else  of  that 
kind.     That  is  just  the  average  grand  total. 

Question.  Well,  that  was  arrived  at  from  a  reduction  of 
all  the  service  to  a  60-foot  car-mile  unit  ? 
Answer.  Yes,  sir. 

Question.  And  then  you  state  the  amount  there  that  they 
ought  to  pay  ? 

Answer.  $93,981,267  or,  based  on  the  authorized  car 
mileage,  36.9  cents  per  60-foot  car-mile. 

Question  (by  Mr. 'Stewart).  When  you  say  ''on  the 
service"  you  mean  on  the  authorized  plus  all  those  addi- 
tions we  have  been  discussing  ? 

Answer.  Yes.  I  said  plus  the  empty  space  as  I  had  set 
it  out  in  my  exhibits. 

Question.  Have  you  applied  this  plan  or  system  to  the 
express  to  ascertain  what  kind  of  result  you  would  arrive 

at 

Answer  (interrupting).  No,  sir. 

Question.  With  reference  to  that  service,  on  the  same 
principles  ?  •  •  i  i 

Answer.  No,    sir;    but,    generally    speaking,    it    would 
require  almost  as  much  per  car-mile  to  produce  what  I 
would  consider  an  adequate  revenue  from  express. 
Question.  You  expect  it  would  ? 
Answer.  Necessarily. 

Question.  Now,  taking  the  express  used  space  as  ex- 
pressed on  your  tables  and  applying  the  same  method  and 
principles,  following  out  in  the  same  manner  to  a  conclu- 
sion, and  assuming  that  we  should  pay  $150,170,648, 
based  only  upon  the  used  space  as  shown  by  your  tables, 
I  assume  you  are  prepared  to  say  that  that  is  the  proper 
revenue  you  would  receive  for  express? 

Answer.  Well,  I  have  not  followed  out  your  calcula- 
tions, but  I  assume  that  what  you  have  done  is  to  apply 
the  36.9  cents  to  the  car-foot  miles  used. 

Question.  That  figure  would  not  be  as  large  tus  a  hun- 
dred and  fifty  million.  It  would  be  somewhat  reduced. 
I  will  substitute  the  exact  figures  after  the  computation 


576 

is  niaclo.  But  the  principle  that  has  been  folknved  out  is 
exactly  the  same  as  you  have  followed  out  for  the  mails, 
taking  the  percentage  of  car-foot  miles  and  applying  it 
to  the  passenger  part  of  the  investment  to  ascertain  the 
investment  for  express,  then  take  7  per  cent  of  that,  then 
multiplying  the  car-miles  of  express  by  the  cost  or  esti- 
mated cost  per  car-mile  ? 

Answer.   Yes,  sir. 

Question.  And  then  ascertaining  the  factors  by  taking 
the  per  cent  of  car-foot  miles  of  express  and  applying  it 
to  the  total  taxes,  and  it  would  produce  something  less 
than  a  hundred  and  fifty  million.  But  assuming  that 
that  method  is  the  same  as  you  applied  to  mails,  you 
would  think  that  whatever  result  we  obtained  would  be 
the  amount  which  you  should  receive  for  the  express  ? 

Answer.  Yes,  if  the  same  calculations  were  made  on 
exactly  the  same  theory,  and  of  course  it  would  only 
vary  from  this  36.9  cents  that  I  claim  for  the  mail  on  the 
basis  of  authorized  by  reason  of  the  difference  in  the 
accompanying  amount  of  empty  space.  That  was  the 
relative  difference  that  it  would  make.  That  is,  it  would 
not  require  quite  as  large  a  per  car-mile,  because  it  does 
not  include  quite  as  much  empty  space. 

Question.  Now,  making  the  same  computation  and 
taking  into  consideration  for  the  expi'ess  a  like  element 
for  this  unauthorized  excess  proportion  in  the  same  per 
cent — 31.2,  I  think  it  was — and  that  process  which  would 
produce  $163,413,461  for  express,  you  would  be  likewise 
of  the  same  conclusion  that  that  is  the  amount  the  rail- 
roads  should   receive  for   express? 

Answer.  No,  sir.  No,  we  can  not  adopt  the  31.2  in 
the  case  of  express,  because  there  is  not  as  much  empty 
mileage  with  the  express. 

Question.  I  was  not  predicating  my  question  upon  your 
admitting  that  there  was  as  much.  I  said  assuming  that 
there  was. 

Answer.  If  we  assume  that  there  was  the  same  empty 
car  mileage,  then  that  naturally  would  follow.  That  is 
merely  a  mathematical  calculation  which  is  rather  ex- 
tended, and  I  expect  you  do  not  want  me  to  do  it  here. 

Question.  No,  sir.  "We  have  made  it  here.  You  can 
verify  it  if  you  like.  Now,  that  being  the  case,  I  believe 
the  revenues  from  express  were  about  a  hundred  and  six 
million  ? 

Answer.  Something  like  that,  for  the  year,  yes,  sir. 

Mr.  Wood.  How  much  ? 

Mr.  Stewart.  A  hundred  and  six  million. 


577 

Question  (by  Mr.  Stewart).  Why  do  not  the  railroad 
companies  revise  their  contracts  with  the  express  companies 
so  as  to  get  this  money  ? 

Answer.  Well,  I  think  that  they  have  been  attempting 
indirectly  for  a  long  time  to  get  more  rates.  They  have 
whacked  away  at  it  Jfrom  time  to  time.  They  succeeded  in 
getting  a  10  per  cent  increase  some  time  in  191S,  and  an- 
other increase  that  amounts  to  about  11  per  cent  effective 
the  1st  of  January,  1919,  and  I  don't  know  that  the  Rail- 
road Administration  generallv  realizes  it,  but  I  do,  and  I 
have  spoken  to  the  administration  with  regard  to  the  fact 
that 

Question.  No;  you  misunderstood  me. 

Answer.  To  the  fact  that  our  pay  is  not  sufficient  from 
the  express. 

Question.  It  is  not  to  make  the  public  pay  more  for  the 
use  of  the  express,  but  that  you  revise  your  contracts  with 
the  express  company  so  that  you  will  receive  more  than  50 
per  cent,  or  make  up  the  difference  between  S106,000,000 
and  $163,000,000. 

Question.  Well,  if  we  demanded,  under  the  conditions 
as  they  obtained  in  the  last  two  years,  more  than  50  per 
cent  from  the  express  companies,  we  would  have  had  them 
in  the  hands  of  receivers  within  a  very  short  time. 

Question.  Well,  that  being  true,  if  the  express  companies 
did  not  secure  permission  to  raise  their  rates  to  the  public  ? 

Answer.  Yes,  sir. 

Question.  If  they  did  that  they  would  not  have  gone  into 
the  hands  of  receivers. 

Answer.  If  they  got  better  rates,  you  mean  ? 

Question.  If  they  got  better  rates. 

Answer.  Well,  then,  we  would  participate  in  any  increase 
that  the  express  company  gets  because  of  the  contracts  that 
we  have  with  them. 

Question.  Do  you  suppose  the  Interstate  Commerce  Com- 
mission would  consent  to  an}'  raise  of  rates  like  that  ? 

Answer.  So  as  to  give  the  railroad  companies  some • 

Question  (interrupting).  Yes;  so  as  to  give  the  railroads 
$168,000,000. 

Answer.  I  think  if  it  was  clearly  proven  to  the  Interstate 
Commerce  Commission  that  we  needed  it,  the  Railroad  Ad- 
ministration would  insist  that  we  got  it. 

Question.  In  the  recent  Express  case  before  the  commis- 
sion do  you  recall  that  when  this  question  of  contract  with 
the  companies  was  under  consideration  and  the  per  cent 
that  the  railroads  were  to  receive  from  the  express  compa- 
nies was  being  considered  on  the  application  of  the  express 

122698—19 3T  J 


comj^aiiios,  that  they  might  incroaso  thoir  rates  to  the  pub- 
lic, that  the  commission  referred  the  matter  back  to  the 
Director  (general  of  liaih-oads,  with  a  request  that  he  inves- 
tigate whether  or  not  5  per  cent  more  could  be  deducted 
from  this  ratio  of  division  of  expenses? 

Answer.  I  don't  know  anything  a])out  the  details,  I 
was  not  present  at  the  hearing,  nor  do  I  know  of  the  corre- 
sjiondence  between  the  Interstate  Commerce  Commission 
and  the  Director  General.  It  was  not  su})mitted  to  me  in 
any  way.  I  have  advised  at  various  times  in  the  past  that 
express' rates  generally  be  raised  in  order  to  conform  to  the 
•general  structure  of  rates  and  the  rate  structures,  and  also 
for  the  ])ur|)ose  of  excluding  from  the  passenger  trains  the 
carriage  of  ordinary  freight. 

Question.  That  they  l)e  raised  to  the  public? 

Answer.  Yes,  sir;  and  in  order  that  the  Railroad  Admin- 
istration might  get  more  for  the  service  that  the  railroads 
were  rendering  to  the  express  companies. 

Question.  But  I  was  calhng  your  attention  to  the  fact 
that  in  that  case  there  was  notKing  submitted  to  the  com- 
mission which  could  lead  it  to  beheve  that  this  division  of 
revenue  was  not  now  fairly  remunerative  to  the  railroad 
companies. 

Answer.  As  to  that,  I  do  not  know.  I  was  not  consulted 
or  I  should  certainly  have  said  that  the  remuneration  was 
insufficient. 

Question.  Now,  assuming  that  in  order  to  keep  the 
express  companies  out  of  the  hands  of  receivers  the  Inter- 
state Commerce  Commission  would  grant  the  application 
of  the  express  companies  for  this  large  increase  in  rates  to 
the  public,  how  long  do  you  suppose  the  express  companies 
would  keep  their  business  when  they  are  in  competition 
with  the  parcel  post,  with  postage  far  less  than  that? 

Answer.  They  would  not  keep  it  long  as  against  parcel 
post.  Wliatever  it  was  possible  to  ship  in  parcel  post 
would  be  prett}^  apt  to  go  that  way. 

Question.  Tfiey  would  practically  lose  all  their  business, 
would  they  not? 

Answer.'  Yes;  and,  incidentally,  the  railroads  would  lose 
still  more. 

Question.  Exactly.  Then,  in  order  to  save  the  situa- 
tion, it  would  be  necessary  for  Congress  to  increase  the 
postage  rate  to  the  public  for  the  mails  ? 

Answer.  No,  sir;  I  don't  think  so. 

Question.  How  would  you  save  the  situation  otherwise  ? 

Answer.  Well,  we  are  only  getting  about  16  per  cent  of 
the  gross  receipts  from  postage,  whereas  we  are  getting 
50^  per  cent  of  the  receipts  of  the  express  companies. 


579 

Question.  Yes,  I  know;  that  is  another  question. 

Answer.  No:  I  think  it  is  collateral. 

Question.  Here  is  the  point,  and  you  have  brought  it 
out  very  clearly  in  your  answer.  Because  of  tliis  com-t 
petition  with  the  parcel  post  they  would  lose  the  business 
unless  the  postage  rates  were  raised,  because,  of  course,  the 
public  would  take  the  lowest  rate.  Therefore,  in  order  to 
save  the  situation  to  the  express  companies  and  the  rail- 
road companies,  it  would  necessarily  be  incumbent  upon 
Congi-ess  to  increase  the  postage  rates  to  reduce  that  com- 
petition, to  bring  it  upon  a  parity,  as  it  is  now? 

Answer.  I  don't  quite  see  it  that  way,  because  my  in- 
vestigation has  led  me  to  believe  that  a  certain  traffic  will 
still  move  by  express,  a  gi-eat  deal  of  it,  and  even  such  as  in 
my  opinion  "ought  not  toniove  by  express,  will  still  continue 
to  move  by  express  under  higher  rates. 

The  investigation  that  I  have  made  shows — particularly 
with  regard  to  this  test  made  at  the  Scare,  Koebuck  & 
Co.  plant — that  notwithstanding  the  fact  that  the  express 
charges  are  gi-eater  on  the  average  than  the  mail  charges— 
I  mean  now  the  postage  that  is  paid  on  the  package — 
the  express  is  still  doing  considerable  business. 

Question.  That  would,  of  course,  continue  only  wheie 
the  incidental  service  furnished  was  a  gi-eater  considera- 
tion than  the  difference  in  cost? 

Answer.  Well,  I  can  not  tell  vou  why,  Mr.  Stewart.  I 
have  not  looked  into  that.     (R."  1329-1338.) 

GROSS  TON-MILE  REVENTJE  FROM  FREIGHT  AND  MAIL, 

In  reply  to  Dr.  Lorenz's  questions  Mr.  Wettling  testified 
as  follows : 

Question.  *  *  *  You  gave  certain  comparisons  be- 
tween the  earnings  from  mail  and  freight,  and  the  pre- 
ceding witnesses  have  also  given  certain  comparisons. 
The  record  does  not  contain,  up  to  this  point,  does  it,  &dj 
comparison  between  the  earning  from  mail  on  some  unit 
and  the  earning  from  all-freight  service  on  some  unit  ? 

Answer.  That  has  not  been  asked  for  and  has  not  beeii 
given. 

Question.  Suppose  I  wished  to  make  such  a  computation, 
could  I  use  your  figure  of  17.8,  if  your  computations  are 
correct— 17.8  cents  revenue  per  car-mile  and  divide  by  50 
plus  3  and  a  fraction  tons  on  an  average  per  car  ?  . 

Answer.  Yes,  sir. 

Question.  Do  you  think  that 

Answer  (interrupting).  You  mean  to  get  the  average 
per  ton-mile  ? 

Question.  Per  gross  ton-mile. 


580 

Answer.  Yes;  that  would  express  it  fairly  well,  but  of 
coui-se  we  must  give  consideration  to  the  difference  in 
cost  in  runnmg  a  gross  ton-mile  in  freight  versus  passenger, 
necessarily. 

Question.  Yes.  But,  in  the  first  place,  to  make  the  com- 
parisons, do  you  think  that  50  is  a  reasonable  average 
weight  for  the  classes  of  cars  used  ui  the  mail  service  ? 

Answer.  I  should  say  that  that  was  practically  a  mini- 
mum. Doctor. 

Question.  Minimum? 

Answer.  Yes.  I  have  made  some  investigation  with 
regard  to  that.  I  asked  a  number  of  roads  as  to  the  weight 
of  their  cars,  and  I  have  quite  a  list  of  them,  not  con- 
venient here — I  guess  it  is  dowqi  at  the  office — in  which  I 
find  that  it  runs  all  the  way  from  40  to  as  high  as  67^  tons. 
I  gave,  as  a  result  of  that  study,  to  Mr.  Mahoney,  a  memo- 
randum of  50  tons  to  use  in  his  gross  ton-mile  compari- 
sons.    I  think  55  would  be  closer  to  it. 

Question.  Well,  that  computation  could  easily  be  made, 
then,  on  that  basis? 

Answer.  Yes. 

Question.  Now,  to  get  the  corresponding  figure  in  the 
freight  service,  would  it  be  proper  to  take  the  freight- 
train  cars,  loaded  and  empty,  of  the  mixed  freight  cars, 
loaded  and  empty,  and  multiply  those  car-miles  by  an 
assumed  weight  per  car,  say  19  or  20  tons  ? 

Answer.  I  should  say  19  would  be  pretty  fair.  I  might 
even  say  you  could  use  20  and  not  be  out  of  the  way 
much. 

Question.  One  computation  I  made  gives  an  average  of 
19.8. 

Answer.  It  has  raised  some  little,  has  it  not  ? 

Question.  That  includes  the  coal  cars  and  refrigerator 
cars. 

Answer.  I  see. 

Question.  Having  so  obtained  the  tare  ton-miles, 
would  we  deduct  a  certain  percentage  for  the  nonrevenue 
freight  cars? 

Answer.  I  should  think  so,  because  the  nonrevenue 
freight  cars  is  a  service  that  is  performed  for  the  benefit 
of  both,  in  behalf  of  both  services,  freight  and  passenger, 
and  also  is  performed  in  the  ratio  of  the  locomotive  miles, 
I  should  say,  because  the  nonrevenue  ton-miles  is  very 
largely  a  matter  of  coal,  and  of  course  the  coal  is  furnished 
rataljly  for  both  services. 

Question  (by  Attorney  Examiner  Brown).  Now,  you 
are  speaking  of  the  transportation  of  company  material? 

Answer.  Yes,  sir. 


I 


581 

Question  (by  Dr.  Lorenz).  Now,  if  you  would  add  to 
that  the  net  revenue  ton-miles  you  would  then  get  the 
gross  ton-miles  in  revenue  freight  service? 

Answer.  Yes,  sir. 

Question.  And  if  you  divide  that  into  the  freight  and 
switching  revenue  you  would  get  a  figure  perhaps  com- 
parable with  the  first  figure  I  mentioned? 

Answer.  You  would,  but  of  course  you  have  to  give 
consideration  to  the  difference  in  the  expense  per  unit. 

Question.  Oh,  yes;  certamly.  I  made  that  computa- 
tion pretty  carefully,  and  find  it  is  3.57  in  the  freight 
service  for  the  year  1917. 

Question  (by  Attorney  Examiner  Brown).  That  is  the 
gross  ton-mile  average  ? 

Answer.  3.57  mills  per  gross  ton-mile,  you  mean? 

Question.  Yes,  sir.  That  compares  with  the  53  and 
a  fraction  divided  into  17.8. 

Answer.  Divided  into  17.8? 

Question.  Into  17.8.  You  need  not  take  the  time  to 
make  the  comparisons.  The  average  haul  in  both  cases, 
taking  the  country  as  a  whole,  would  be  similar,  would 
it  not,  for  the  mail  and  the  freight?  I  have  forgotten 
what  it  is  for  the  mad. 

Answer.  Well,  the  average  haul  for  the  mail  would  be 
about  240  or  250  miles,  and  the  average  for  the  freight 
in,  not  talking  individually,  but  the  country  as  a  whole, 
would  be  about  the  same.  It  would  not  be  far  off.  The 
290  miles,  I  think  it  is,  or  somethmg  like  that.  (R.  1355- 
1359.) 

THE  SHORT  LINES. 

THE  LINES  FOR  WHICH  TESTIMONY  WAS  SUBMITTED 
WERE  THOSE  INDEPENDENTLY  OWNED  AND  OPER- 
ATED. 

Mr.  Bird  M.  Robinson,  president  of  the  Short  Line 
Railroad  Association,  testified  on  direct  examination  as 
follows : 

Question  (by  Attorney  Examiner  Brown).  Now,  a 
short  line  railroad,  within  your  definition,  I  suppose,  is  one 
where  there  is  actually  an  initial  and  terminal  service,  and 
where  the  mail  route  does  not  run  off  a  main  line  onto  a 
branch  line,  onto  a  short  line;  that  is,  if  there  is  a  break  in 
the  mail  route  and  then  you  take  up  the  mail  anew  and 
carry  it  over  the  line  of  that  road  ?     Is  that  so  ? 

Answer.  The  short  lines  I  had  in  mind  when  testifving 
are  primarily  the  independently  owned  and  operated  short 
roacls  running  out  into  the  country  with  the  main  lines. 


582 

Question.  Well,  take  the  Midland  Valley,  running;  from 
Wichita  to  Fort  Smith,  Ark.,  or  the  Manistee  &  Northeast- 
ern, a  road  that  runs  a  distance  of  200  miles  and  is  in 
competition  with  other  railroads.  Arc  those  denominated 
short  lines  within  your  definition  ? 

Answer.  Yes. 

*  *  *  *  * 

Question.  Now,  as  succinctly  as  you  can — you  are  an 
experienced  man  in  the  matter — will  you  give  a  definition 
of  a  short  line  that  comes  within  the  terms  that  are  here 
asking  for  a  differential  over  the  rate  that  is  granted  to 
other  lines  ? 

Answer.  That  is  a  difficult  question  to  answer. 

Question.  Well,  it  is  a  question  that  the  commission  will 
have  to  answer,  is  it  not  ? 

Answer.  We  speak  primarily  for  the  independently 
owned  and  operated  short-line  railroads,  and  in  that  we 
include  roads,  say,  under  200  miles  in  length,  and  we  take 
into  consideration  the  revenue  derived,  to  arrive  at  a  con- 
clusion as  to  whether  it  should  be  classed  as  a  short  line 
or  not.  For  example,  the  Atlanta  &  West  Point  is  only 
about  100  miles  long,  and  yet  it  is  really  a  trunk-line 
railroad.  Its  earnings— its  situation  takes  it  out  of  the 
class  of  short  lines. 

Question.  You  have  in  there  no  railroad,  as  I  understand 
it,  that  would  be  classed  as  class  1  under  the  commission's 
classification  ? 

Answer.  I  think  the  Midland  Valley  probably  would  be. 

Question.  With  earnings  over  $1,000,000? 

Answer.  Over  $1,000,000.  Finishing  the  answer  I  was 
attempting  to  give  to  your  previous  question,  I  would 
say  that  the  Georgia  &  Florida  for  example,  which  is 
approximately  400  miles  long,  is  classed  by  us  as  a  short 
line  because  of  the  thinness  of  its  revenue. 

Question.  You  do  not  know  whether  it  ever  carries  an 
apartment  car  or  a  distributing  car  on  it  ? 

Answer.  I  think  it  probably  does.  Running  the  length 
it  does,  it  probably  has  apartment  service. 

Question.  Then',  it  would  not  be  in  any  different  situation, 
would  it,  from  the  proposition  of  the  Post  Office  Depart- 
ment, on  the  space  basis  of  payment  than  any  other  line 
that  ran  the  same  distance,  400  miles  ? 

Answer.  Probably  not.     (R.  4022-4024.) 

Mr.  D.  M.  SwoBE,  president  of  the  Western  Association 
of  Short  Line  Raiboads,  testified  on  direct  examination  as 
follows : 


5sa 

Question  (by  Attorney  Examiner  Brown).  What  you 
represent  are  independent  lines;  they  are  not  connected 
with  or  a  part  of  trunk-line  systems,  are  they? 

Answer.  No,  sir;  these  are  all  independently  owned  and 
operated  steam  roads.     (R.  2716.) 

COMPANIES  HAVE  MORE  INTEREST  IN  CARRYING  MAILS 
THAN  THE  MERE  REVENUE  DERIVED. 

Mr.  Bex  B.  Caix,  of  the  Gulf,  Texas  &  Western  Railroad 
Company  testified  on  cross-examination  as  follows: 

Question  (by  Mr.  Stewart).  Now,  don't  you  think  that 
the  question  of  transportation  of  mails  over  these  lines  you 
descri})e  is  entitled  to  a  different  kmd  of  consideration  than 
the  transportation  of  ordinary  traffic  ? 

Answer.  I  can  not  see  it. 

Question.  Has  not  the  transportation  of  the  mails  an 
element  in  it  of  benefit  to  the  roads  which  the  transporta- 
tion of  a  commodity  has  not  ? 

Answer.  Well,  I  don't  recall  anything,  Mr.  Stewart.  If 
you  can  suggest  to  me,  perhaps  I  overlooked  something. 

Question.  This  perhaps  will  suggest  somethino^  to  you. 
When  you  transport  a  commodity  over  your  line  your 
interest  in  it  is  merely  in  the  revenue  you  derive  from  that 
transportation,  is  it  not? 

Answer.  Yes ;  I  suppose  that  is  correct. 

Question.  Now,  in  transporting  the  mails  you  have  that 
same  interest,  what  you  will  receive  for  it  for  carrving  it 
over  your  line.  That  far  the  parallel  is  good.  But  in 
addition  to  that  you  iiave  an  added  element  in  what  the 
mails  will  mean  in  the  development  of  the  country  through 
which  your  line  runs,  and  on  which  your  line  depends  for 
its  well-being.     Is  not  that  true  ? 

Answer.  Well,  I  think  the  mail  is  very  much  like  any 
other  public  service.  It  follows  development.  Of  course 
there  would  be  no  necessity  for  mail  unless  there  had  been 
some  chara^'tcr  of  develop^^^cnt  somewhere,  and  the  first 
consideration  in  the  construction  of  the  railroad,  of  course, 
is  to  build  up  the  country,  and,  necessarily,  any  con- 
venience or  anything  that  'makes  the  public  more  com- 
fortable or  gives  it  a  service  of  one  kind  or  another  enters 
into  it.     (R.  2914,  2915.) 


584 

MANNER  OF   ACCOMPLISHING   DIFFERENTIALS  UNDER 
CONTRACT  WITH  CONNECTING  LINES. 

Mr.  Cain  tcstiliod  on  cross-cxaniinatioii  as  follows: 

Question  (by  Mr.  Stewart).  vSpcaking  of  the  differen- 
tials, Mr.  Cain,  that  you  referred  to — ^and  I  am  asking  for 
information — how  were  they  realized  by  your  short  lines, 
how  were  they  accomplished  ^ 

iVnswer.  Well,  in  most  cases  it  was  accomplished  by 
contract  with  the  connecting  lines.  In  the  case  of  the 
Georgia  roads,  to  which  I  referred,  of  cbui-se  it  is  accom- 
plished by  the  commission  itself.  We  have  the  right  in 
juy  State  to  appeal  to  the  commission  if  we  do  not  agree 
upon  the  division. 

Question.  Then  it  is  really  a  matter  of  contract  between 
the  main  line  and  the  short  line  ? 

^Vnswer.  Well,  if  you  can  make  the  contract.  If  not, 
then  you  may  resort  to  the  cotnmission,  of  course,  at  all 
times,  and  thev  will  fix  the  divisions  as  between  the  short 
line  and  the  long  hne.     (K.  2913.) 

APPLICATION  OF  EXPRESS  DIFFERENTIAL  A  MATTER 
OF  CONTRACT. 

Mr.  RoBixsoN  testified  on  cross-examination  as  follow^s: 

Question  (by  Mr.  Stewart).  You  spoke  of  a  differential 
in  favor  of  express.  How  is  that  applied,  so  far  as  the 
short  lines  are  concerned  ? 

Answer.  They  get  a  percentage  of  the  entire  rate.  Some 
of  them  get  one  percentage  and  some  another.  Many  of 
them  carry  the  express  themselves.  In  only  one  instance 
have  I  ever  had  an  express  contract.  I  would  not  take  one, 
because  I  could  carry  the  express  myself.  In  that  case  I 
got  adequate  compensation,  whereas  I  could  not  get  it 
through  the  regular  express  company. 

Question.  If  the  regular  express  company  operated  over 
your  road  you  would  not  receive  any  differential  on  express  ? 

Answer.  It  is  owing  to  v»diat  your  contract  was. 

Question.  Well,  that  would  be  a  matter  of  contract, 
then,  between  the  railroad  and  the  express  company? 

Answer.  That  is  correct. 

Question.  And  that  is  all  you  meant  when  you  spoke  of  a 
differential  on  the  express  ? 

Answer.  Yes.     (R.  2896,  2897.) 


585 

REGULAR  RECEIPT  OF  MAILS  AN  ELEMENT  IN  THE 
DEVELOPMENT  IN  WHICH  THE  RAILROADS  ARE 
INTERESTED. 

Mr. Robinson  testified  on  cross-examination  as  follows: 

Question  (by  Mr.  Stewart).  Mr.  Robinson,  you  have 
said  that  these  short  lines,  so  called,  are  developing  roads, 
in  substance,  to  cpite  an  extent? 

^Vnswer.  I  said  as  a  rule  they  were  pioneers  gomg  out 
and  developins;  a  section  of  the  country.  I  think  that  was 
a  correct  statement. 

Question.  Tsually  extendinc]:  into  undeveloped  parts  of 
the  country? 

Answer.  As  a  rule  I  think  that  is  true. 

Question.  Do  you  thmk  that  the  carriage  of  the  mails 
over  such  a  line  is  an  important  thing  for  a  road  which  is 
developing  a  pioneer  country  ? 

^VnswerT  I  do  thmk  it  is  of  some  importance  to  the 
communitv. 

Question.  Those  sections  of  the  country  which  are  bemg 
developed  bv  the  buildmg  of  new  roads  would  not  progress 
very  far,  would  they,  unless  the  population  received  the 
mails  regularlv  ? 

Answer.  I  don't  think  the  mail  is  the  developer  of  any 
section  of  the  country.  If  so,  the  rural  free  deliveries  would 
develop  a  country.  ^  I  think  it  is  the  railroad  that  goes  in 
and  furnishes  the  transportation  that  really  furthers  the 
development,  and  that  the  mail  is  a  mere  mcident,  because 
they  get  the  mail  under  ordinary  circumstances  in  almost 
everv  communitv. 

Question.  But  is  it  not  true  that  the  development  which 
the  railroad  is  dependhig  upon  to  sustain  it  is  largely 
influenced  by  the  fact  that  the  people  who  are  developmg 
the  countrv  for  vou  do  receive  the  mails  regularly  ? 

^Vnswer.'^That  is  an  element,  but  I  don't  think  it  is  a 
large  element. 

Question.  You  think  it  would  not  make  much  difference, 
then,  to  those  people,  whether  they  received  the  mail  or 
not?  . 

Answer.  I  answered  that  as  to  my  owm  experience,  i 
have  built  several  railroads,  and  m  every  instance  I  have 
tried  to  keep  the  mails  off  tlie  road,  and  in  no  instance  did 
I  find  that  the  development  was  retarded  so  long  as  I  did 
not  handle  the  mails,  and  I  never  saw  any  perceptible 
benefit  to  come  from  my  carrying  the  mails. 

Question.  Is  it  not  true  in  all  these  cases  people  who 
were  livhig  in  the  country  tlu'ough  which  your  road  ran 
were  very  insistent  upon  having  mail  service  established 
on  the  road  ? 


58G 

Answer.  It  is  true  that  the  people  have  uro;ed  the 
carrying:  of  the  mails  on  tlie  train;  tlierefore  the  department 
urtjced  it.  Otherwise  they  never  would  have  heen  on  any 
tram  that  I  nm.  The  injustice  of  the  department  in  its 
administration  in  handling'  the  mail  and  of  the  inadequacy 
of  pay  was  such  that  at  no  time  was  I  ever  wdllmg  to  carry 
the  mail  except  when  I  was  forced  to. 

Question.  Then  your  objection  and  your  opinion  are 
based  entirely  upon  that  element  and  not  upon  the  non- 
importance,  you  mii^ht  say,  of  the  mail  to  the  section  of 
the  country  tlirouo;!!  which  the  road  runs? 

Answer.  Well,  I  thmk  I  answered  before  that  I  did  not 
see  that  the  development  of  the  comitry  was  retarded 
when  I  did  not  carry  the  mails,  and  I  never  saw  any  very 
perceptible  increase  in  the  development  when  I  did  carry 
them. 

Question.  Do  you  think  the  development  of  the  country 
depends  somewhat  on  the  mails  ? 

Answer.  To  a  very  considerable  extent,  of  course. 

Question.  To  a  very  considerable  extent  ? 

Answer.  But  the  development  does  not  necessarily  de- 
pend upon  the  carrying  of  the  mails  by  the  railroad.  The 
department  is  getting  the  mails  out  all  the  time  by  rural 
carriers,  and  pay  a  rural  carrier  more  than  they  pay  me. 
For  example,  m  the  case  of  the  Tennessee  .Railroad,  vdien 
I  was  carrying  the  mail  approximately  42  miles,  getting 
something  ^like  $460  for  it,  they  would  pay  rural  free 
delivery  carriers  that  went  out  from  different  stations  on 
my  line,  carrying  a  small  fraction  of  the  jnail  I  had  carried, 
and  they  would  pay  him  some  $1,100  or  $1,200,  and  that 
they  paid  him  for  carrying  that  24  miles,  and  I  would  get 
$46*0  for  carrying  it  42  miles,  and  carrying  many  times  the 
amount.  So'  that  I  felt  the  injustice  of  the  situation,  and 
I  did  not  see  any  perceptible  difference  in  the  development 
of  the  country.     (R.  2892-2895.) 

PROPER  FOR  COMMISSION  TO  TAKE  INTO  CONSIDERA- 
TION THE  POSSIBILITY  OF  ADMINISTRATIVE  IM- 
PROVEMENTS. 

Mr.  Stewart  stated  during  the  direct  examination  of 
Mr.  Williamson,  of  the  Chesapeake  Western  Railway,  the 
following: 

One  more  thing  on  this  matter,  in  connection  with  what 
I  said  before  as  to  the  scope  of  the  inquiry  of  this  commis- 
sion, and  this  question,  I  think,  can  be  better  presented 
in  our  brief.  I  want  it  distinctly  understood,  in  connec- 
tion with  what  I  said,  that  in  determining  the  plan  or 


687 

measure  by  which  the  rates  shall  be  adjusted,  it  is  proper 
for  the  commission  to  take  into  consideration  the  possi- 
bility of  all  administrative  improvements  that  might  be 
feasible.     (R.  2866.) 

RAILROAD  PLAN  OF  RAILWAY  MAIL  PAY  NOT  IN- 
DORSED BY  MIDDLETOWN  &  UNIONVILLE  RAIL- 
ROAD. 

Mr.  Smith,  of  the  Middletown  &  Unionville  Railroad, 
t  estified  on  cross-examination  as  follows : 

Question  (by  Mr.  Stewart).  Mr.  Smith,  have  you  ex- 
amined the  plan  which  is  presented  here  by  the  railroads  ? 

Answer.  I  have  not. 

Question.  You  have  not;  you  have  not  seen  it,  then? 

Answer.  No,  sir. 

Question.  Then,  you  do  not  know  that  under  that  plan, 
with  probably  four  trains  a  day,  your  pay  would  be  about 
$•1,181,  and  you  are  asking  here  nearly  $6,000— $500  a 
month  would  be  $6,000  ? 

Answer.  I  don't  know  anything  about  that  plan,  who 
got  it  up,  or  anything  about  it.  I  know  what  it  costs  me 
to  handle  the  mails. 

Question.  We  have  understood  that  it  has  been  indorsed 
by  the  Short  Line  Association. 

Answer.  Not  to  my  knowledge.  I  have  not  indorsed 
it;  I  have  not  seen  it.     (R.  2839,  2840.) 

FREIGHT  REVENUE  DECLINED  OWING  TO  DECREASED 
BUSINESS,  BUT  MAIL  PAY  REMAINED  STATIONARY 
NOTWITHSTANDING  FALLING  OFF  IN  VOLUME. 

Mr.  L.  G.  Cannon,  of  the  Nevada  Northern  Railroad 
Co.,  testified  on  cross-examination  as  follows: 

Question  (by  Mr.  Stewart.)  Now  in  regard  to  your 
freight  business,  I  believe  you  said  that  you  were  doing 
about  50  per  cent  of  what  you  did  before,  consequently 
your  freight  business  has  varied,  it  has  fluctuated  and 
dropped  off,  as  I  understand.  Did  the  mail  business,^  in 
so  far  as  the  authorization  is  concerned,  drop  off  during 
that  period  in  the  same  way? 

Answer.  Oh,  yes,  sir.  It  must  necessarily.  You  see  half 
our  population  has  gone  up,  practically. 

Question.  But  your  pay  did  not  decrease  on  the  mails? 

Answer.  Oh,  the  mail  is  just  the  same,  yes. 

Question.  Although  your  pay  for  freight  did  fluctuate 
50  per  cent? 

Answer.  Yes.     (R.  2823,  2824.) 


588 

ADVANTAGE  TO  THE  RAILROADS  TO  HAVE  THE  COMMU- 
NITIES THEY  SERVE  PROVIDED  WITH  MAIL  SERVICE. 

Mr.  SwoBE  testified  on  cross-examination  as  follows: 

Question  (by  Mr.  Stewart).  Do  you  think  it  is  of  any 
advantage  to  carry  mail  matter,  now,  just  waiving  the 
parcel  post  for  the  time  being  ? 

Answer.  We  do,  if  we  are  paid  for  all  of  the  services. 

Question.  Of  course,  I  assume  that  you  are  always  paid 
that 

Answer.  We  have  never  been. 

Question.  Whether  you  think  so  or  not.  So  it  really  is 
an  advantage  to  your  railroad  for  the  communities  you 
serve  to  be  served  with  the  mails  ? 

Answer.  Yes,  sir;  it  is. 

Question.  And  of  course  those  communities  would  not 
exist  very  long  unless  they  could  get  the  mails,  would  they  ? 

Answer.  No,  sir. 

Question.  They  would  not  stay  there  unless  the  mails 
could  be  gotten  there  ? 

Answer.  No,  sir;  unquestionably.      (R.  2794,  2795.) 

SHOULD  NOT  RECEIVE  SAME  COMPENSATION  FOR 
TRANSPORTING  PARCELS  AS  RECEIVED  FOR  TRANS- 
PORTING A  PASSENGER. 

Mr.  SwoBE  testified  on  cross-examination  as  follows: 

Question  (by  ]\Ir.  Stewart).  You  referred  to  the  space 
which  a  passenger  would  probably  occupy  in  your  cars  ? 

Answer.  Yes,  sir. 

Question.  And  compared  it  with  the  space  which 
would  be  occupied  by  these  parcels  which  are  shown  on 
your  exhibit  ? 

Answer.  Yes,  sir. 

Question.  Do  you  think  that  you  should  receive  the 
same  rate  of  compensation  for  transportation  for  these 
parcels  that  you  receive  for  a  passenger  ? 

Answer.  Oh,  no;  it  is  just  simply  a  comparison.  (R. 
2786.) 

POST  OFFICE  DEPARTMENT  CIRCULAR  LIMITING  QUAN- 
TITY OF  PARCEL  POST  TO  BE  ACCEPTED  FOR  MAILING 
OVER  STAR  ROUTE. 

During  the  cross-examination  of  ^Ir.  Swobe,  Mr. 
Stewart  referred  to  circular  letter  of  the  Second  Assistant 
Postmaster  General  on  above  subject  and  concerning  which 
Mr.  Swobe  testified  as  follows: 

Question  (by  Mr.  Stewart).  Are  you  familiar  with  the 
department's  rule  which  limits  the  shipment  of  this  mat- 
ter in  question  to  200  pounds  a  day  ? 


589 

Answer.  Yes,  sir. 

Question.  And  if  that  be  true,  how  is  it  possible  that 
this  parcel  post  has  taken  away  all  of  your  less  than  car- 
load business  ? 

Answer.  That  has  had  absolutely  no  effect  in  this 
section  of  the  country.  The  various  stores,  or  a  large 
majority  of  these  stores,  are  cooperative  stores.  You 
will  find  canned  goods,  flour,  salt,  and  sugar  moving 
consigned  to  everybody  connected  with  the  store,  in 
order  to  overcome  that,  and  that  is  being  done  right 
along. 

Question.  If  that  were  done,  of  course  it  would  be  a 
violation  of  the  spirit  of  this  order,  would  it  not? 

Answer.  I  think  not,  the  way  the  order  reads. 

Question.  Are  you  famihar*^  with  the  purpose  of  the 
order  ? 

Answer.  I  am  famihar  with  the  wording  of  the  order — 
from  one  individual  to  one  individual. 

Question.  Did  you  ever  know  why  it  was  issued — on 
the  complaint  of  roads  such  as  yours  ? 

Answer.  Why,  I  assumed  it  was  on  complaint.  We 
had  been  complaining  ever  since  it  had  been  put  in. 

'Mr.  Stewaet:  I  offer  this  sheet  of  instructions  relating 
to  the  shipment  of  merchandise  to  be  hauled  on  a  star 
route,  under  dates  of  November  2,  1914,  November  7, 
1916,  and  November  22,  1916. 

****** 

Mr.  Stewart:  This  order  of  November  2,  1914,  is  as 
follows : 

The  Postal  La-ws  and  Regulations,  edition  of  1913,  are  amended  by 
the  addition  of  the  following  as  section  478i: 

"Sec.  478^.  The  Postmaster  General  may  in  his  discretion,  by  order, 
fix  the  time  Tvitliin  which  all  parcels  of  the  fourth  class  shall  be 
delivered." 

That  is  quoted  from  the  act  of  March  9,  1914. 

2.  \Mien  a  very  large  or  imusual  number  of  parcels  containing  mer- 
chandise of  the  same  kind,  other  than  perishable  matter  addressed  to 
the  same  postoffice,  are  offered  for  mailing,  the  postmaster  should  noti- 
fy the  Second  Assistant  Postmaster  General  and  await  instructions 
before  accepting  the  same. 

Notice  of  November  7,  1916: 

Referring  to  paragraph  2  of  section  478^,  Postal  Laws  and  Regulations, 
it  is  directed  that  hereafter  when  more  than  200  pounds  of  merchandise, 
other  than  perishable  matter,  are  riffered  for  mailing  by  one  sender  to 
one  addressee  on  the  same  day  it  shall  be  considered  a  large  or  unusual 
shipment  witliin  the  meaniiig  of  the  sectitm  referred  to  above,  and 
postmasters  shall,  in  every  instance,  before  accepting  such  shipments, 
notify  the  Second  Assistant  and  await  instructions. 


590 

Notice  of  November  22,  1916: 

Referring  to  iiistruptions  of  November  7,  191 6,  limiting  shipments  of 
mercluvndise  to  200  pounds  by  one  sender  to  one  addressee  on  the  same 
day,  the  attention  of  postmasters  is  especially  directed  to  the  fact  that 
this  order  does  not  apply  to  perishable  matter;  nor  will  it  apply  to  ship- 
ments between  postomces  where  no  star  route  haul  is  involved. 

The  last  paragraph  it  is  not  necessary  to  read.     (R. 

2781-27S3.) 

COST   OF    SERVICE   PLUS   A   REASONABLE   RETURN   AN 
IDEAL  BASIS. 

Mr.  Robinson  testified  on  cross-exammation  as  follows 

Question  (by  Mr.  Stewart)  .  If  it  is  true  that  this  mat- 
ter must  be  considered  in  a  general  way,  and  it  would  be 
impracticable  to  produce  your  500  or  600  witnesses  here, 
would  it  not  be  reasonable  to  make  an  adjustment  to 
these  short  lines  on  some  universal  basis,  some  general 
basis,  as,  for  instance,  cost  of  service,  plus  a  reasonable  re- 
turn ? 

Answer.  My  opinion  of  that  is  that  you  are  going  into  an 
impractical  proposition  as  to  the  cost  of  service.  If  you  go 
into  the  mountain  districts  you  will  find  the  cost  of  service 
one  thing,  and  if  you  go  into  the  prairie  districts  you  will 
find  the  cost  of  service  another  thing.  The  conditions  are 
so  varied  and  varymg  that  I  do  not  think  you  can  act  upon 
any  such  basis. 

Question.  Are  not  your  other  rates  fixed  upon  some  such 
basis  as  that,  cost  being  the  basis  ? 

Answer.  Only  to  a  limited  extent. 

Question.  Then,  your  freight  rates  and  passenger  rates 
do  not  give  any  consideration  to  the  cost  of  performing  the 
service  ? 

Answer,  I  did  not  say  not  any. 

Question.  Well,  how  much? 

Answer.  That  is  difficult  to  tell.  The  rates  are  made  by 
the  commissions  in  most  of  the  States.  It  is  not  possible 
for  me  to  know  what  enters  into  their  minds  and  what 
governs  them  when  they  decide  what  the  rates  shall  be. 

Question.  Don't  you  think  cost  should  be  an  element? 

Answer.  Cost  is  an  element. 

Question.  Well,  how  much  is  it  an  element  ? 

Answer.  It  is  a  question  of  who  is  going  to  decide  the 
question.  I  can't  tell  what  a  given  commission  will  do 
when  it  determines  what  a  rate  shall  be. 

Question.  Then,  you  do  not  know  that  they  have  ever 
considered  cost  to  any  great  extent  in  the  fixing  of  your 
rates  ? 

Answer.  Well,  I  assume  necessarily  that  they  have  taken 
that  into  consideration. 


591 

Question.  Then,  would  it  not  be  very  reasonable  to  take 
cost  into  consideration  in  this  case  ? 

Answer.  As  part  of  the  consideration — yes. 

Question.  Then,  if  we  had  the  cost  fairly  well  deter- 
mined, and  to  that  should  be  added  a  fair  return,  would 
not  that  be  a  correct  rate  ? 

.Vnswer.  Possibly  it  might  he  a  correct  rate;  possibly  it 
might  not. 

Question.  Well,  3'ou  say  it  woidd  not  be  ? 

Answer.  I  said  possibly  it  would  not.  Possibh'  it  would, 
and  possibly  it  would  not. 

Question.  Well,  don't  you  tliink  it  would  be  ? 

.Vnswer.  I  am  not  always  prepared  to  say  that  cost  of 
the  service  is  the  correct  basis  for  a  charge  for  a  service 
rendered. 

Question.  With  a  fair  return.  You  do  not  want  more 
than  the  cost  and  a  fair  return,  do  you,  for  any  service  ? 

Answer.  In  the  railroad  business  I  have  never  been  able 
to  get  an  ideal  condition,  such  as  you  describe. 

Question.  But  if  you  got  it,  it  would  be  ideal,  would  it 
not  ? 

^Vnswer.  It  would  be  ideal. 

Question.  Well,  that  is  what  I  am  gettmg  at.  So,  if  we 
could  ascertain  the  fair  cost  of  this  service,  then  add  a  rea- 
sonable return,  that  would  be  ideal,  would  it  not  ? 

Answer.  It  would  be  all  right;  it  would  be  all  right. 

Question.  And  if  we  had  ascertained — just  leavmg  out  of 
consideration  the  ascertamment  for  your  short  Imes  as  a 
class — if  we  had  ascertained  the  average  cost  for  all  the 
service,  and  then  there  should  be  added  to  that  a  fair  differ- 
ential for  that  service,  you  would  think  that  would  be  a 
good  rate  ? 

Answer.  It  depends  on  who  is  gomg  to  ascertaui  that 
cost.  If  the  Post  Office  Department  is  to  ascertain  the 
cost,  I  would  not  accept  it  under  any  circumstances  that  I 
have  ever  known.  My  experience  with  the  Post  Office 
Department  is  that  they  are  miconscionable  when  they 
come  to  deal  with  the  railroads  in  paying  for  the  mail. 
That  has  been  my  experience,  and  I  would  not  want  to 
trust  them  to  determine  the  cost  or  reasonable  estimate. 

Question.  Well,  of  course,  that  is  your  personal  opinion, 
Mr,  Robinson,  which  is  not  substantiatea  by  anythhig  in 
this  record.  Now,  if,  however,  an  ascertainment  of  cost 
should  be  made,  which  should  have  the  sanction  of  the 
Interstate  Commerce  Commission,  would  you  have  any 
further  confidence? 

Answer.  I  would  have  a  great  deal  more  confidence  in  it. 


592 

Quostion.  Don't  you  Iciiow  that  any  ascertainment  of 
tlic  kind  which  will  be  accepted  here  will  be  such  an  ascer- 
tahiment  ? 

Answer.  I  hope  so. 

Question.  And  therefore  your  gratuitous  remark  with 
reo;ard  to  the  Post  Office  Department  was  entirely  un- 
called for  ? 

Answer.  That  may  be  your  opinion,  but  when  I  am 
called  upon  to  answer  the  question  as  to  the  cost  of  service 
and  a  fair  return,  based  on  the  proposition  made  by  the 
department  here,  then  I  feel  that  it  was  not  gratuitous,  and 
I  was  entitled  to  answer  the  question  and  give  my  personal 
views.     I  am  the  witness,  and  entitled  to  testify. 

Question.  And  you  leave  out  of  consideration  the  knowl- 
edge that  any  cost  ascertainment  to  be  accepted  here  must 
beapproved  by  the  commission.     (R.  4037-4040.) 

DIFFERENTIAL  FOR  SHORT  LINES  MAY  BE  MEASURED 
IN  ONE  WAY  BY  THE  DIFFERENCE  IN  FREIGHT  AND 
PASSENGER  RATES  FROM  TRUNK  LINE  RATES. 

Mr.  Robinson  testified,  in  reply  to  inquiries  by  Attorney 
Examiner  Brown  as  follows: 

Question  (by  Attorney  Examiner  Brown).  Now,  I  un- 
derstood from  your  counsel  that  these  short  line  railroads, 
as  a  rule,  have  higher  passenger  fares  and  have  higher 
freight  charges  than  the  trunk  lines,  generally  speaking. 

Answer.  That  is  true. 

Question.  Do  you  mean  to  say  the  difference  in  the  rates 
that  should  be  paid  these  short  lines  should  be  measured 
by  the  difference  in  their  freight  and  passenger  fares  ? 

Answer.  That  may  be  one  way  of  measuring  it. 

Question.  What  I  mean  by  that  is  if  it  is  10,  15  or  25  per 
cent  over,  you  would  add  it  ? 

Answer.  I  say  that  is  one  way  of  measuring  it. 

Question.  The  reason  given,  I  suppose,  by  the  State  com- 
missions, and  I  know  by  tlie  Interstate  Commerce  Com- 
mission, for  the  allowance  of  higher  rates  on  such  roads  as 
that,  is  because  of  the  higher  operating  expenses  per  mile  of 
line,  or  things  of  that  kind  ? 

Aiiswer.  That  enters  into  it  to  a  very  considerable  ex- 
tent.    (R.  4025,  4026.) 

IN  GENERAL. 
It  was  stipulated  that  the  other  superintendents  of  Rail- 
way Mail  Service  would  testify  substantially  to  the  same 
facts  as  Mr.  Gaines  and  Mr.  Brauer,  with  reference  to  the 
administration  of  the  service  in  the  several  divisions. 
(R.  248,  249.) 


ARGUMENT. 

PLANS  FOR  RAILWAY  MAIL  PAY— PAST  AND  PRESENT. 

The  carriage  of  the  mails  on  raih'oads  began  with  the 
construction  of  such  means  of  transportation.  Usually 
the  railroad  when  constructed  provided  for  transportation 
between  points  where  service  had  theretofore  been  per- 
formed by  stage  coach  or  steamboats.  The  contracts 
which  had  been  made  for  the  stage  coach  or  steamboat 
service  were  generally  renewed  in  the  same  form  but  with 
the  railroad  as  contractor. 

As  competition  for  service  upon  the  newly  constructed 
roads  was  impracticable,  Congress  by  the  act  of  1838  pro- 
vided that  every  railroad  shall  be  a  post  route,  and  that  the 
Postmaster  General  shall  cause  the  mail  to  be  transported 
thereon,  provided  it  could  be  done  on  reasonable  terms  and 
by  not  paying  more  than  25  per  cent  more  than  the  cost 
for  similar  transportation  by  stage  coaches.  The  act  of 
1839  limited  the  amount  that  could  be  paid  to  not  more 
than  $300  per  mile  per  annum  to  any  railroad  for  the  con- 
veyance of  one  or  more  daily  mails. 

It  is  said  that  under  this  arrangement  the  profits  of  the 
railroads  were  very  great.  In  1845  Congress  provided  a 
method  for  more  accurately  paying  for  service  rendered 
by  providing  for  three  classes  of  routes  according  to  the 
size  of  the  mails,  the  speed  with  which  they  were  conveyed, 
and  the  importance  of  the  service,  and  prescribed  maximum 
rates  for  each  class.  There  was  provision  also  for  an  in- 
creased rate  in  case  one-half  the  service  was  performed  at 
night. 

By  reason  of  the  growth  of  the  service  and  the  fact  that 
the  classification  of  routes  did  not  insure  uniform  rates  of 
pay  tor  like  services  rendered,  the  compensation  is  said  to 
have  been  comparatively  reduced,  and  the  advent  of 
postal  cars  for  the  distribution  of  letter  mail  en  route, 
which  feature  probably  originated   in    1851  and  became 

122698—19 38  (593) 


594 

recoj^nized  as  a  postal  feature  in  KS64,  iiitioduciiig  the  ele- 
ment of  space  in  addition  to  weight,  it  became  evident  that 
a  new  system  of  railroad  mail  pay  was  necessary. 

Accordingly,  in  1873,  Congress  enacted  the  weight-pay 
schedule  of  rates  based  upon  average  daily  weights  of 
mails  carried  on  the  several  routes,  and  also  provided  for 
a(Ulitional  pay  for  full  railway  post  office  cars  40  and  more 
feet  in  length,  which  statute,  with  the  amending  acts  of 
1876,  1878,  and  1907,  have  provided  the  scheme  for  com- 
pensating the  railroads  for  carrying  the  mails  since  that 
date  until  the  passage  of  the  act  of  Congress  of  July  28, 
1916,  providing  lor  the  space-basis  plan  of  payment. 

A  more  detailed  history  of  the  Railway  Mail  Service  will 
be  found  in  Appendix  A,  hereto,  and  the  several  acts  of 
Congress  prescribing  the  rates  of  pay  for  the  transportation 
of  tiie  mails  by  railroads  and  for  their  performance  of  serv- 
ice in  connection  therewith,  will  be  found  set  forth  in 
Appendix  C,  hereto. 

With  the  introduction  of  the  railway  post-ofTice  apart- 
ment in  cars  for  the  purpose  of  the  distribution  of  the  mails 
en  route,  as  above  stated,  the  question  as  to  whether  or 
not  the  basis  for  the  payment  of  compensation  should  be 
space  more  than  weight  began  to  be  considered  and  dis- 
cussed. From  1868  down  to  the  present  time  officers  of 
the  Department,  departmental  commissions,  congressional 
commissions,  and  officials  of  railroad  companies  have  ex- 
pressed views  in  favor  of  a  space-basis  system.  Among  the 
officers  of  the  department  who  have  in  some  measure 
favored  a  space-basis  system  and  whose  views  are  incor- 
porated in  the  appendix  were  J.  N.  Davis,  who  was  in 
charge  of  the  first  division  which  handled  railroad  mail 
service  in  the  Department;  George  S.  Bangs,  General 
vSuperintendent  of  Railway  Mail  Service  in  1875;  and 
Theodore  N.  Vail,  General  Superintendent  of  Railway  Mail 
Service  in  1877.  The  special  departmental  and  congres- 
sional commissions  that  favored  a  space  basis  were  the 
Hubbard  Special  Commission,  1878;  the  Subcommittee  of 
the  Senate  Committee  on  Transportation  Routes  to  the 
Seaboard,  Senator  John  H.  Mitchell,  1874;  the  Elmer- 
Thompson-Slater  Commission,  1883;  Postmaster  General, 


595 

1884;  the  Loud-Wolcott  Commission,  1901;  Postmaster 
General  Hitchcock's  report  to  Congress,  1911;  and  the 
Bourne  Commission — Joint  Committee  on  *  *  *  Compen- 
sation for  the  Transportation  of  Mail,  1914.  These  views 
have  been  collected  and  set  forth  in  Appendix  B,  hereto. 

THE     PRACTICAL     OPERATION     OF     THE     SPACE-BASIS 
SYSTEM. 

In  General. 

With  the  consent  and  approval  of  the  Commission  the 
Postmaster  General  stated  the  greater  part  of  the  railroad 
mail  service  upon  the  space  basis  from  November  1,  1916. 
The  laws,  regulations  and  instructions  under  which  said 
service  has  been  administered  are  set  forth  in  Post  Office 
Department  Exhibit  No.  1.  The  standard  floor  plans  for 
railway  post-ofhce  cars  are  set  forth  in  the  original  ' '  State- 
ment of  the  Postmaster  General,"  filed  herein,  and  in  Post 
Office  Department  Exhibits  Nos.  2  and  20.  (Digest,  etc., 
pp.  48,  49,  64,  supra.)  The  number  of  cars  necessary  to  fill 
authorizations  of  specific  units  as  of  March  27,  1917,  in  full 
railway  post-office  cars  and  apartment  railway  post-office 
cars ;  the  number  of  cars  necessary  as  operated  b}'  the  rail- 
road companies ;  the  number  of  cars  of  lesser  length  author- 
ized, operated  and  paid  for  pro  rata;  and  the  nimiber  of 
storage  cars  necessary  to  cover  regular  authorizations,  etc., 
supplementing  the  original  "Statement  of  the  Postmaster 
General, "  are  set  forth  in  Post  Office  Department  Exhibit 
No.  25.  (Digest,  etc.,  p.  68,  supra.)  The  kind  of  mail  car 
equipment  (full  railway  post-office  cars  and  apartment 
railway  post-office  cars)  owned  and  operated  in  connection 
with  the  railroad  mail  service  as  of  same  date,  whether  of 
steel,  steel  underframe,  or  wood,  and  of  the  various  unit 
lengths  prescribed  in  the  act,  are  set  forth  in  Post  Office 
Department  Exhibit  No.  26.     (Digest,  etc.,  p.  68  supra.) 


ANNUAL  RATES  OF  PAY  TO  THE  SEVERAL  RAILWAY  COMMON 
CARRIERS    FOR    THE    MONTH    OF    APRIL,   1917. 

The  statement  of  the  Postmaster  General  filed  at  the 
inception  of  this  case  shows  inter  alia  the  annual  rates  of 
pay  allowed  by  the  Postmaster  General  (being  at  the  max- 
imum rates  provided  by  section  5  of  the  act  of  July  28, 
1916)  to  the  several  railroads  whose  mail  service  was 
stated  on  the  space  basis  of  pay,  as  of  November  1,  1916. 
The  total  miles  of  service  per  annum  authorized  was 
577,263,764,98;  the  total  annual  rate  of  pay,  comprising 
line  pay  and  initial  and  terminal  allowances,  was  $64,- 
384,469.54.      (Statement,  pp.  20  to  659,  inclusive.) 

The  same  statement  shows  also  the  annual  rates  of  pay 
allowed  by  the  Postmaster  General  (being  at  the  maxi- 
mum rates  allowed  by  the  acts  of  Mar.  3,  1873  (R.  S. 
4002),  July  12,  1876,  19  Stat.,  79,  June  17,  1878,  20  Stat., 
142,  and  Mar.  2,  1907,  34  Stat.,  1212)  to  the  several  rail- 
roads whose  mail  service  was  stated  on  the  weight  basis 
of  pay,  as  of  November  1,  1916.  The  total  annual  rate 
of  pay  for  transportation  was  $1,102,245.23.  (Statement, 
pp.  661  to  687,  inclusive.) 

Post  Office  Department  Exhibit  9  shows  the  amounts  of 
compensation  allowed  by  the  Postmaster  General  (being 
at  the  maximum  rates  provided  by  section  5  of  the  act  of 
July  28,  1916)  to  the  several  raih'oads  whose  mail  service 
was  stated  on  the  space  basis  of  pay,  for  the  month  of 
April,  1917,  of  the  statistical  period  selected.  The  total 
pay  for  April,  1917,  comprising  the  line  pay  and  initial 
and  termmal  allowances  was  $4,801,704.84. 

Post  Office  Department  Exhibit  10  shows  the  amounts 
of  compensation  allowed  by  the  Postmaster  General  (at 
the  maximum  rates  allowed  by  the  acts  of  1873,  1876, 
1878,  and  1907)  to  the  several  railroads  whose  mail  serv- 
ice was  stated  on  the  weight  basis,  for  the  month  of  April, 
1917,  of  the  statistical  period  selected.  The  total  pay  for 
April,  1917,  was  $89,374.89. 

The  annual  rates  of  pay,  by  railroads,  is  thus  brought 
up  to  the  period  of  other  statistical  information  submitted. 


597 

The  annual  miles  of  service,  annual  rates  of  pay — line 
pay  and  initial  and  terminal  allowances — by  units  of  serv- 
ice on  the  routes  stated  upon  the  space  basis  of  pay  as 
authorized  on  November  1,  1916,  and  the  unit  rates  per 
mile  for  authorized  service  are  set  forth  in  Post  Office 
Department  Exhibit  No.  4.  (Digest,  etc.,  pp.  50, 51,  supra.) 
However,  the  service  authorized  as  of  that  date  represented 
substantially  the  service  in  operation  under  the  w^eight- 
basis  system,  which  preceded  the  space-basis  system,  and 
before  the  beginning  of  the  statistical  period  the  depart- 
ment had  effected  many  economies  in  the  statement  of 
the  service.  Therefore  the  service  as  authorized  on  March 
27,  1917,  the  beginning  of  the  statistical  period,  more  cor- 
rectly expresses  the  status  under  the  new  system  of  pay. 
The  details  of  the  annual  miles,  the  annual  rates  and  allow- 
ances by  units  of  service,  and  the  unit  rates  per  mile  for 
authorized  service  as  of  the  latter  date  are  all  set  forth  in 
Post  Office  Department  Exhibit  No.  5.  (Digest,  etc.,  pp. 
52,  53,  supra.)  It  will  be  informing  to  present  the  results 
of  this  exhibit  in  the  following  details : 

RELATION    OF    THE    DIFFERENT    UNITS    OF    SERVICE. 

In  the  following  synthesis  of  data  the  relations  of  the 
different  units  of  service  (space  basis)  as  of  the  statistical 
period  March  27  to  April  30,  1917,  are  shown— (1)  with 
respect  to  miles  of  service  performed  in  the  several  author- 
ized units  of  space;  (2)  with  respect  to  miles  of  service 
performed  in  the  several  authorized  units  of  space  equated 
to  a  common  standard,  namely,  a  60-foot  car;  (3)  with 
respect  to  ton-miles  of  mail  service  performed  in  the  several 
authorized  units  of  space;  (4)  with  respect  to  the  average 
loads  carried  in  the  several  authorized  units  of  space;  (5) 
wutii  respect  to  the  average  loads  per  linear  foot  carried  in 
the  authorized  units  of  space;  (6)  with  respect  to  the  aver- 
age length  of  trip  for  the  several  authorized  units  of  space; 
(7)  with  respect  to  pay  allowed  for  service  (mileage)  per- 
formed in  the  several  authorized  units  of  space;  (8)  with 
respect  to  the  resulting  ton-mile  rates  of  pay  allowed 
for  the  service  performed  in  the  several  authorized  units  of 
space. 


598 

SPACE    AND   MILEAGE. 

(a)  The  total  annual  mileage  of  service  performed  in  the 
several  authorized  units  of  space  is  shown  in  Post  Office 
Department  Exhibit  Ko.  5  to  be  557,151,915.99,  the  ratios 
in  per  cents  being  as  follows: 

Miles  of  service  performed  in  the  following  units  of  space. 

units  of  space.  \''%lX'' 

1.  60-foot  full  R.  P.  O.  ears 1  15.  46 

2.  30-foot  apartment  R.  P.  O.  cars I  26.05 

3.  15-foot  apartment  R.  P.  O.  cars I  17.40 

4.  60-foot  storage  cars !  9. 00 

5.  30-foot  storage  space }  1. 93 

6.  15-foot  storage  space 2. 81 

7.  7-foot  storage  space I  2. 54 

8.  3-foot  storage  space i  1. 82 

9.  7-foot  closed-pouch  space I  3. 38 

10.  3-foot  closed-pouch  space 19. 61 

11.  All  full  and  apartment  R.  P.  O.  cars  (1,  2,  and  3) !  58.91 

12.  All  full  R.  P.  O.  and  full  storage  cars  (1  and  4) i  24. 46 

13.  All  30-foot,  15-foot,  7-foot,  and  .S-foot  storage  space  (5,  6,  7,  and  8) 9. 10 

14.  All  closed-pouch  space  (9  and  10) 22.99 


(b)  The  above  shows  the  ratios  of  the  miles  of  service  of 
the  several  units  as  authorized.  It  does  not,  therefore,  show 
the  ratios  of  the  mileage  of  service  performed  in  the 
authorized  units  equated  to  units  of  the  same  size.  Wlien 
the  miles  of  service  of  the  several  units  have  been 
equated  to  the  60-foot  car  basis,  the  total  is  shown  to  be 
252,195,307.18,  and  the  ratios  are  as  follow^s  (Post  Office 
Department  Exhibit  No.  51): 

Miles  of  service  performed  in  the  following  units  of  space  equated  to 
60-foot  cars. 


Units  of  space. 


Per  cent  of 
whole. 


1.  60-foot  full  R.  P.  O.  cars 

2.  30-foot  apartment  R.  P.  O.  cars 

3.  15-foot  apartment  R.  P.  O.  cars 

4.  60-foot  storage  cars 

5.  30-foot  storage  space 

6.  15-foot  storage  space 

7.  7-foot  storage  space 

8.  3-foot  storage  space 

9.  7-foot  (doscd-pouch  space 

10.  3-foot  closed-pouch  space 

11.  All  full  and  apartment  R.  P.  O.  cars  (1,  2,  and  3) 

12.  All  full  R.  P.  O.  and  full  storage  cars  (1  and  4) 

13.  All  30-foot,  15-foot,  7-foot,  and  3-foot  storage  space  (5,  6,  7,  and  8). 

14.  All  closed-pouch  space  (9  and  10) 


34.16 
28.78 


2.13 
1.55 

.65 
.20 
.87 
2.17 

72.55 
54.04 
4.53 
3.04 


599 


WEIGHT    AND    MILEAGE. 


The  total  computed  annual  ton-miles  of  mail  service 
on  the  railroads  for  the  year  1917  is  shown  to  have  been 
826,090,715  (Post  Office  Department  Exhibit  No.  11). 
The  estimated  ton-miles  of  service  performed  in  the  several 
units  of  authorized  space  are  shown  in  Post  Office  Exhibit 
No.  52,  and  the  per  cent  of  each  to  the  whole  is  there 
stated  as  follows : 

Estimated  ton-miles  of  service  performed  in  the  units  of  space. 


Units  of  space. 


1.  60-foot  full  R.  P.  O.cars 

2.  30-foot  apartment  R.  P.  O.  cars 

3.  lo-foot  apartment  R.  P.  O.  cars 

4.  60-foot  storage  cars 

5.  30-foot  storage  spaf e 

6.  15-foot  storage  space 

7.  7-foot  storage  space 

8.  3-foot  storage  space 

9.  Closed-pouch  space 

10.  All  full  and  apartment  R.  P.  O.  cars  (1,  2,  and  3) 

11.  All  full  R.  P.  O.  and  full  storage  cars  (1  and  4) 

12.  All  30-foot,  15-foot,  7-foot,  and  3-foot  storage  space  (5,  6,  7,  and  8) 


Per  cent  of 

ton-miles 

to  the 

whole. 


26.48 
14.72 
3.14 
39.79 
4.28 
3. 53 
1.71 
.49 


44.34 
66.27 
10.01 


AVERAGE    LOADS. 


(a)  The  relation  as  to  average  loads  carried  in  the  sev- 
eral authorized  units  of  space  is  shown  in  Post  Office 
Department  Exhibit  No.   12.     The  general  averages  are 

as  follows : 

Service  in  units  of  space. 


'nits  of  space. 


60-foot  full  R.  P.  O.  cars 

30-foot  apartment  R.  P.  O.  cars 
l.-i-foot  apartment  R.  P.  O.  cars 

60-f()ct  stf.ra?e  cars 

.•?0-f(if  t  storage  space 

1.5-f;)i,t  storage  space 

7-foot  stirage  space 

3-foot  storage  space 


Average 
load. 


Poujid.i. 
5,079 
1,675 
536 
13,114 
6,575 
3,726 
1,998 
795 


600 

(b)  The  average  load  per  linear  foot  of  the  authorized 
units  of  car  s])ace  is  shown  by  Post  Ofhce  Department 
Exhibit  No.  50  to  be  as  follows: 


Service  in  units  of  space. 


Units  of  space. 


Average 

load  per 

linear  foot. 


60-foot  full  R.  P.  O.  cars 

30-foot  apartment  R.  P.  O.  cars 
15-foot  apartment  R.  P.  O.  cars 

60-foot  storage  cars 

30-foot  storage  space 

15-foot  storage  space 

7-foot  storage  space 

3-foot  storage  space 


Pounds. 
84.65 
55.  83 
35.  73 
218. 56 
219. 16 
248.  40 
285. 42 
265. 00 


AVERAGE    HAULS. 

The  relation  as  to  the  average  length  of  tri]:)  for  the 
several  authorized  units  of  car  space  over  the  stated  rail- 
way post-office  runs  is  shown  by  Post  Office  Department 
Exhibit  No.  16  to  be  as  follows: 

Service  in  units  of  space. 


Units  of  space. 


Average 

length 

unit  trip. 


60-foot  full  R.  P.  O.  cars 

30-foot  apartment  R.  P.  O.  cars 
15-foot  apartment  R.  P.  O.  cars 

60-foot  storage  cars 

.30-foot  storage  space 

15-foot  storage  space 

7-foot  storage  space 

3-foot  storage  space 

7-foot  closed-pouch  space 

3-foot  closed-pouch  space 


SPACE-MILEAGE    AND    PAY 


The  relation  between  the  miles  of  service  performed  by 
the  several  units  of  authorized  space  and  the  pay  allowed 
by  the  Postmaster  General  under  the  terms  of  the  act  of 
July  28,  1916  (39  Stat.,  412),  therefor,  is  shown  by  Post 


601 

Office  Department  Exhibit  No.  5.  The  total  annual  pay 
authorized  March  27,  1917,  was  $59,753,679.21,  and  the 
ratios  expressed  in  per  cents  is  as  follows : 

Service  viileage.  by  units  of  space. 


Units  of  space. 


Per  cent  of 
all  pay. 


I 

1.  60-foot  full  E.  P.O.  cars |  30.90 

2.  30-foot  apartment  R.  P.  O.  cars i  29.03 

3.  15-foot  apartment  R.  P.  O.  cars !  13. 22 

4.  60-foot  storage  cars j  17. 89 

5.  30-foot  storage  space i  1-94 

6.  15-foot  storage  space |  1-50 

7.  7-foot  storage  space ;  -62 

8.  3-foot  storage  space |  -20 

9.  7-foot  closed-pouch  space ;  1  ■  06 

10.  3-foot  closed-pouch  space 1  3. 64 

11.  All  full  and  apartment  R.  P.  O.  cars  (1,  2,  and  3) 73.15 

12.  All  full  R.  P.  O.  and  full  storage  cars  (1  and  4) |  48. 79 

13.  All  30-foot,  15-foot,  7-foot,  and  3-foot  storage  space  (5,  6,  7,  and  8) |  4.27 

14.  All  closed-pouch  space  (9  and  10) 1  4. 70 


TON -MILEAGE    AND   PAY. 

The  relation  between  the  resulting  ton-mile  rates  of  pay 
allowed  for  service  performed  in  the  several  authorized 
units  of  space,  is  shown  in  Post  Office  Department  Exhibit 
No.  52,  as  follows: 

Service  {ton-miles)  by  units  of  space. 


Units  of  space. 


Rate  per 
ton-mile. 


60-foot  full  R.  P.  O.cars 

30-foot  apartment  R.  P.  O.  cars 

15-foot  apartment  R.  P.  O.  cars ' 

60-foot  storage  cars 

30-foot  storage  space 

15-foot  storage  space 

7-foot  storage  space 

3-foot  storage  space 

Closed-pouch  space 

All  full  and  apartment  R.  P.  < >.  cars 

All  full  R.  P.  ').  and  full  storage  cars 

All  30-foot,  15-foot,  7-foot,  and  3-foot  storage  space 
All  services— average 


S.44 
14.27 
30.40 
3.25 
3.28 
3.07 
2.64 
3.07 
5.79 
11.93 
5.32 
3.08 
7.23 


602 

RECAPITULATION. 

The  foregoing  combined  in  one  table  for  comparative 
reference  is  as  follows : 


Service  performed  in— 

1- 

O   O 

Jl 

P 

ill 

ll 

ll 

111 

c  s  S 

Hi 
IIS 

1 
If 

li 

ll 

If 

ll 

,2.2 
ll 
1 

I 
o 

S 

1 

o 

11 

1 
"3 

1 

1 

2 

3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

8 

9 

1.  eo-foot  full  R.  p.  0.  cars . . 

2.  30-footapartmentR.P.O. 

15.46 
26.05 

17.40 
9.00 
1.93 
2.81 
2.54 
1.82 
3.38 

19.61 

58.91 

24.46 

9.10 
22.99 

34.16 

28.78 

9.61 
19.88 

2.13 

1.55 
.65 
.20 
.87 

2.17 

72. 55 

54.04 

4.53 
3.04 

26.48 

14.72 

3.14 
39.79 
4.28 
3.53 
1.71 
.49 
1  5.86 

44.34 
66.27 
10.01 

5,079 
1,675 

536 
13,114 
6,575 
3,726 
1,998 

795 

84.65 

55.83 

35.73 
218.56 
219. 16 
248.  40 
285.  42 
265. 00 

367 

205 

86 
420 
263 
172 
1.54 
104 
/    100 
(      48 

30.90 

29.03 

13.22 
17.89 
1.94 
1.50 
.62 
.21 
1.06 
3.64 

73.15 

48.79 

4.27 
4.70 

8.44 
14.27 

3.  15-foot  apartment  R.  P.O. 
cars 

30.38 

4.  60-foot  storage  cars 

5.  30-foot  storage  space 

6.  1.5-foot  storage  space 

7.  7-foot  storage  space 

8.  3-foot  storage  space 

9.  T-footclosed-pouch  space. 

3.25 
3.28 
3.07 
2.64 
3.07 
1    5.79 

11. 9S 

10.  3-footclosed-pouch -space. 

11.  All  full  and  apartment 

R.  P.  O.  cars  (items  1, 
2,  and  3) 

12.  All  full  R.  P.  b.  and  full 
storage   cars   (items    1 
and  4) 

5.32 

13.  All  30-foot,  15-foot,  7-foot, 
and  3-foot  storage  space 
(items  5  6  7  and  8) 

3.08 

14.  All    closed-pouch    space 

(items  9  and  10) 

15.  All  service    average 

7.23 

WEIGHING    FOR    STATISTICAL    PURPOSES. 

For  the  information  of  the  Commission  the  Postmaster 
General  had  the  mails  upon  all  railroad  mail  routes  weighed 
during  the  statistical  period  from  March  27  to  April  30, 
1917,  and  the  average  daily  weights  computed  thereon 
and  the  rates  of  pay,  as  provided  by  the  act  of  1873  and 
the  amending  acts  (weight  basis),  applied  thereto.  This 
was  for  information  only  and  not  for  statement  of  com- 
pensation. The  results  are  stated  in  Post  Office  Depart- 
ment Exhibit  No.  38.     (Digest,  etc.,  pp.  72,  73,  supra.) 


603 

TOTAL  AA'ERAGE  DAILY  WEIGHT,  LENGTH  OF  ROUTES,  AND 
TOTAL  POUND-MILES  PER  DAY  AND  COMPUTED  TON-MILES 
PER  YEAR. 

Based  upon  the  weighing  of  the  mails  on  all  railroad 
mail  routes  throughout  the  entire  country  for  the  statistical 
period  from  March  27  to  April  30,  1917,  Post  Office  De- 
partment Exhibit  No.  11  (Digest,  etc.,  p.  59  supra)  shows 
results  of  the  computations  based  upon  these  statistics 
as  follows: 

Total  average  weight  carried  per  day,  20,131,302 

pounds. 
Length  of  routes  over  which  mails  were  carried, 

234,306.95  miles. 
Pound-miles  per  day,  4,526,524,485. 
Computed  ton-miles  per  year,  1917,  826,090,715. 

ECONOMY  IN   SPACE   REQUIRED  FOR  MAIL  PURPOSES  AND   IN 
MILES    OF    OPERATION,    UNDER    THE    SPACE    SYSTEM. 

The  space-basis  system  has  resulted  in  marked  economy 
in  the  amount  of  space  in  trains  necessary  and  used  for  the 
transportation  of  the  mails,  and  in  the  miles  of  operation 
necessary.  This  economy  has  inured  to  the  benefit  of  the 
railroads  by  releasing  to  them  a  large  amount  of  space  in 
the  trains  for  railroad  purposes,  and  to  the  benefit  of  the 
department  and  the  public  in  reducing  the  necessary 
expenditure  for  the  transportation.  Notwithstanding  this 
reduction  in  expenditure  the  railroads  are  paid  the  full 
rates  for  every  mile  of  operation  of  space  devoted  to  the 
carnage  of  the  mails. 

Post  Office  Department  Exhibit  No.  15  shows  these 
economies  in  amount  of  space  rec^uired  and  in  miles  of 
operation,  for  each  unit  of  space  for  mail  purposes.  The 
miles  of  service  per  annum  is  given  for  each  unit  as  of 
November  1, 1916  (the  date  on  which  the  service  was  stated 
on  the  space  basis),  and  as  of  June  30,  1918,  after  the  oper- 
ating economies  became  effective  in  the  mail  transportation 
service. 

The  decrease  in  the  miles  of  service  for  the  respective 
units  is  shown  to  liave  been  as  follows:  60-foot  railway 


604 

post-office  cars,  20.85  per  cent;  30-foot  apartment  railway 
post-office  cars,  24.01  per  cent;  60-foot  storage  cars,  22.71 
per  cent;  30-foot  storage  space,  34.11  per  cent;  15-foot 
storage  space,  25.25  per  cent;  7-foot  storage  space,  9.82  per 
cent;  7-foot  closed-pouch  space,  3.5  per  cent;  and  3-foot 
closed-poucli  space,  2.13  per  cent.  The  15-foot  apartment 
railway  post-office  cars  increased  11.11  per  cent,  and  the 
3-foot  storage  space  increased  2.8  per  cent.  The  net  de- 
crease for  the  total  of  all  units  was  12.61  per  cent. 

Wlien  the  authorized  miles  of  service  for  the  respective 
units  as  of  these  two  dates  are  equated  to  60-foot  car-miles, 
the  result  as  to  saving  of  space  expressed  in  60-foot  car- 
miles  is  as  follows: 

Per  cent. 

60-foot  R.  P.  O.  cars 20.  85 

30-foot  apartment  R.  P.  O.  cars 24.  01 

60-foot  storage  cars 22.72 

30-foot  storage  space 34. 12 

15-foot  storage  space 25.  26 

7-foot  storage  space 9-82 

7-foot  closed  pouch  space 3.  50 

3-foot  closed  pouch  space 2.13 

Net  decrease  for  all 19.  28 

(There  were  increases  in  the  15-foot  apartment  car  and  the  3-foot 
storage  space  units.) 

It  is  therefore  shown  that  between  November  1,  1916,  and 
June  30,  1918,  the  operation  of  the  space-basis  system 
resulted  in  the  requirement  by  the  Post  Office  Department 
of  19.28  per  cent  less  car  space  than  was  required  to  conduct 
the  service  under  the  old  weight  system. 

SAVING    TO    THE    GOVERNMENT    IN    AGGREGATE    AMOUNT    OF 
PAY   TO   THE    RAILROADS. 

The  authorization  and  operation  of  the  service  on  the 
space  basis  of  pay  resulted  in  material  saving  to  the  Gov- 
ernment in  the  aggregate  amount  of  pay  to  the  railroads. 

With  the  consent  of  the  Commission  and  in  accordance 
with  the  terms  of  the  statute,  the  Postmaster  General 
stated  the  major  part  of  the  service  on  the  space  basis  of 
pay  from  November  1,  1916. 

The  maximum  rates  fixed  by  the  statute  for  service  on 
such  basis  resulted  in  higher  aggregate  pay  to  the  com- 
panies generally  than  they  were  receiving  under  the  terms 


605 

of  the  preceding  statutes  providing  maximum  rates  based 
on  weights  with  additional  pay  for  full  railway  post-office 
cars. 

On  October  31,  1916,  the  aggregate  annual  rate  of  com- 
pensation under  the  old  statutes  (weight  basis  with  addi- 
tional pay  for  full  railway  post-office  cars)  was  $62,164,- 
305.30.     (Post  Office  Department  Exhibit  No.  38.) 

On  November  1,1916,  the  date  from  which  the  pay  on  the 
space  basis  became  effective,  the  aggregate  rate  of  annual 
pay  was  $64,447,982.47.  (Post  Office  Department  Exhibit 
No.  4.)  This  was  pay  on  the  new  basis  for  the  service  as  it 
was  stated  and  operated  on  October  31  under  the  old  basis. 
The  Department  had  not  had  the  time  or  opportunity  of 
restating  the  service  so  as  to  more  properly  conform  to  the 
new  condition.  The  necessary  survey  of  the  service  by  the 
field  officers  in  order  to  determine  what  changes  in  author- 
ization and  operation  should  be  made  in  the  interest  of 
economy  and  public  service  was  begun  at  once  and  con- 
tinued up  to  the  statistical  period.  During  this  time  these 
necessary  and  desirable  changes  were  made  by  authoriza- 
tions of  the  Postmaster  General,  so  that  when  the  statis- 
tical period  began,  March  27,  1917,  the  aggregate  rate  of 
annual  pay  had  become  $59,753,679.21.  (Post  Office 
Department  Exhibit  No.  5.) 

Further  readjustments  of  the  service  to  the  new  conditions 
have  resulted. in  further  decreases  in  the  aggregate  annual 
rates  of  pay  on  the  dates  named  below: 

On  June  30,   1917,  $57,177,396.02.     (Post  Office  Dept.  Exhibit 

No.  6.) 
On  March  31,  1918,  $52,909,489. 4&.     (Post  Office  Dept.  Exhibit 

No.  7.) 
On  June  30,  1918,  $52,182,052.27.     (Post  Office  Dept.  Exhibit 

No.  8.) 

The  above-named  rates  of  annual  pay  were  all  at  the 
maximum  individual  rates  named  in  the  statute.  The  re- 
ductions in  the  amounts  of  aggregate  pay  represent  econo- 
mies effected  in  the  authorization  and  operation  of  the 
service  under  the  new  system,  in  accordance  with  the  plans 
of  the  Department  as  represented  by  its  officers  to  Congress 
and  to  the  Conmaission  and  has  been  accomplished  without 


606 

impairment  of  service  and  in  the  interest  of  the  pubUc. 
Reduced  to  tabular  form,  these  annual  rates  of  pay  appear 
as  follows: 

Annual  rate  of  pay. 

Oct.  31,  19 16 $62, 164,  305.  30 

Nov.  1,  1916 64,  447,  982.  47 

Mar.  27,  1917 59,  753,  679.  21 

June  30,  1917 57, 177,  39G.  02 

Mar.  31,  1918 52,  909,  489.  45 

June  30,  1918 52, 182, 052.  27 

The  Administration  of  the  Service  Under  the  Space- 
basis  System. 

The  administration  of  the  space-basis  system  has  been 
satisfactory  from  an  operating  standpoint,  with  respect  to 
the  transportation  of  the  mails.  It  has  been  in  keeping 
with  the  spirit  of  the  plan  and  has  been  uniform  throughout 
the  country.  (Abstract,  etc.,  Mr.  Knox,  p.  103  suyra.)  The 
relations  between  the  railroads  and  the  officers  of  the  postal 
service  have  been  generally  cooperative.  (Abstract,  etc., 
Mr.  Gaines,  p.  IQ'^^swpra.)  Certain  changes  have  been  sug- 
gested as  the  result  of  experience  during  the  test  period. 
(Abstract,  etc.,  Mr.  Knox,  Mr.  Gaines,  pp.  105,  106,  sujyra.) 
The  Department  has  also  set  forth  its  proposed  plan  re- 
ferred to  hereinafter. 

A  comparison  of  cost  of  administration  of  the  service 
under  the  weight-basis  system  and  the  space-basis  system 
is  favorable  to  the  latter.  The  evidence  shows  that  there 
is  little  difference  in  the  cost  of  the  supervision  of  the 
service  in  the  Department  and  in  the  field,  while  under  the 
space-basis  system  the  cost  of  quadrennial  weighings  has 
been  eliminated,  reference  to  which  wiU  be  made  herein- 
after. (Abstract,  etc.,  Mr.  Stone,  Mr.  Corridon,  pp.  107-1 1 1 . 
supra.) 

The  Authorization  of   Service   and   Adaptation    of 
Operation  Thereto. 

in  general. 

The  specific  units  of  space  authorized  under  the  space- 
basis  system  are  provided  for  by  the  statute  of  1916. 
(Post  Olhce  Department  Exhibit  No.  1  and  Appendix  C.) 
The  regulations  and  the  instructions  governing  the  same 
are  included  in  said  exhibit. 


607 

The  general  manner  of  making  the  regular  authoriza- 
tions is  detailed  in  the  testimony  included  in  the  Abstract  of 
Evidence — ^Authorization  of  service,  etc.,  pp.  111-125 ,  sujyra . 

Space  authorizations  are  controlled  by  the  Post  Office 
Department  and  are  made  to  meet  the  needs  of  the  serv- 
ice; regular  authorizations  are  made  upon  recomimenda- 
tions  originating  with  the  field  officers  which  reach  the 
Department  through  the  channels  of  the  Railway  Mail 
Service  and  are  finally  acted  upon  by  the  Division  of  Rail- 
way Adjustments  and  approved  by  the  Second  Assistant 
Postmaster  General. 

Operating  conditions,' so  far  as  the  Railway  Mail  Service 
needs  are  concerned,  govern  these  recommendations.  With 
respect  to  the  changes  in  the  car  units  from  60  to  30  feet 
or  from  30  feet  to  15  feet  in  space,  these  are  made  only  at 
divisional  points,  and  such  divisional  points  are  defined  in 
the  instructions  in  Post  OfB.ce  Department  Exhibit  No.  1, 
pages  43  and  44,  paragraphs  20,  21,  22,  and  23.  With  re- 
spect to  these  divisional  points  the  Department  does  not 
dictate  to  the  railroads  concerning  the  operation  of  theu" 
trains,  but  selects  certain  physical  facts  as  the  basis  upon 
which  an  order  will  be  made  authorizing  a  change  in  car 
unit.  These  physical  facts  are  set  forth  in  the  instructions 
referred  to. 

The  railroads  have  found  it  convenient  in  some  cases  to 
operate  be^^ond  the  divisional  points  larger-sized  units 
than  those  authorized,  and  the  reasons  for  doing  so  are  dis- 
cussed in  the  testimony  set  forth  in  the  Abstract  of  Evi- 
dence under  various  headings.  There  are  distinct  advan- 
tages to  the  railroads  in  some  cases  from  such  operation, 
as  for  instance,  where  destination  loads  are  placed  in  several 
cars  by  the  railroad  in  lieu  of  one  load  in  one  car,  which  is 
fully  explained  by  Mr.  Gaines  for  the  Department  (Abstract  of 
Evidence,  pp.1 19,120,su2>ra).  However,  whatever  may  have 
been  the  practice  of  the  railroads  in  operating  the  larger- 
sized  cars  under  authorizations  which  are  reduced  at  the 
divisional  points,  such  operation  has  not  been  typical  of 
conditions  in  all  territory  throughout  the  country.  The 
evidence  shows  conclusively  and  with  practically  no  con- 
troversy that  the  operation  of  cars  by  the  railroads  during 


608 

the  test  period  was  the  same  as  their  operation  under  the 
weight-basis  system.  That  is  to  say,  wherever  and  under 
whatever  conditions  the  railroads  continued  the  operation 
of  hirger-sized  cars  than  authorized,  or  operated  tliem  over 
distances  unauthorized  or  upon  days  unauthorized,  such 
operation  was  identical  with  the  manner  in  which  the 
railroads  operated  the  same  cars  under  the  weight-basis 
system  which  preceded  the  inauguration  of  the  space-basis. 
(Abstract  of  Evidence — Authorization  of  service,  etc., 
pp.  120-122,  supra.) 

RAILWAY    POST-OFFICE  .CAR    UNITS. 

The  statute  of  1916  under  which  the  space-basis  authoriza- 
tions are  made  provides  for  railway  post-office  service  in  full 
railway  post-ofhce  cars  of  a  standard  size  of  60  feet  in  length 
and  in  standard-sized  apartments  of  15  and  30  feet  in  length 
in  cars.  The  manner  in  and  the  conditions  under  which 
authorizations  are  made  for  railway  post-office  cars  are 
described  in  detail  by  witnesses  Knox,  Brauer,  and  Gaines 
for  the  Department.  The  conditions  of  the  service  are 
under  constant  observation  of  the  field  officers,  and  the 
necessities  for  the  distribution  of  mails  en  route  or  for 
increases  in  the  space  in  which  mails  are  so  distributed  are 
considered  and  reported  upon  with  recommendation. 
These  reach  the  Department  and  are  acted  upon,  the 
orders  duly  made  and  the  railroads  concerned  notified. 
When  emergency  authorizations  on  a  train  exceed  a  certain 
number  in  a  given  period  they  are  superseded  by  regular 
authorizations. 

All  authorizations  for  distributing  space  in  railway  post- 
office  cars  are  made  for  both  directions  at  the  maximum 
rate  of  compensation.  The  relative  importance  of  the 
service  performed  in  the  60-foot  full  railway  post-office 
cars,  the  30-foot  apartment  railway  post-office  cars,  and  the 
15-foot  apartment  railway  post-office  cars  (the  distributing 
cars)  is  set  forth  in  Post  Office  Department  Exhibit  No.  5, 
Digest,  etc.,  page  52,  supra,  and  further  noted  on  pages  598- 
602,  supra.  (Abstract  of  Evidence— Railway  post-office 
cars,  pp.  125-130,  supra.) 


609 

STORAGE-CAR    UNITS. 

The  act  of  1916  provides  for  authorization  of  storao-e-car 
mail  service  in  standard-sized  cars  of  60  feet  in  length. 
The  manner  of  and  the  conditions  under  which  authoriza- 
tions are  made  for  storage-car  units  are  described  in  del  ail 
by  witnesses  Knox  and  Gaines  for  the  Department.  The 
service  in  full  storage  cars  is  tlie  transportation  of  mails 
made  up  in  sacks  and  pouches  and  generally  carried  through 
for  some  distance.  No  mails  are  distributed  in  such  cars. 
Payment  is  authorized  for  the  movement  of  the  car  in  both 
directions,  which  includes  in  many  cases  the  empty  return 
movement,  unless  the  railroad  makes  use  of  the  car  in  such 
direction. 

Changes  are  made  in  authorizations  only  at  divisional 
points.  If  the  railroad  sees  fit  to  operate  the  car  a  greater 
distance  for  reasons  of  its  own,  the  Department  does  not 
object,  but  pa3-s  for  the  operation  only  as  authorized. 
(Abstract  of  Evidence — Storage  car  units,  pp.  130-132, 
supra.) 

CLOSED-POUCH    AND    STORAGE-SPACE    UNITS. 

The  act  of  1916  provides  for  authorizations  of  closed- 
pouch  mail  service  in  units  of  7  feet  and  3  feet  in  length, 
and  for  storage  space  in  units  of  3  feet,  7  feet,  15  feet,  and 
30  feet  in  length.  The  manner  in  and  the  conditions 
under  which  authorizations  are  made  for  closed-pouch 
and  storage-space  units  are  described  in  detail  by  witnesses 
Knox,  Brauer,  and  Gaines,  for  the  Department. 

The  basis  for  determining  the  linear  feet  of  space  to  be 
authorized  to  accommodate  closed-pouch  mails  and  stor- 
age-space mails  in  less  than  carloads,  is  a  count  of  sacks, 
considering  15  sacks  of  mail  as  equivalent  to  1  linear 
foot,  both  sides  of  the  car,  and  3  packages,  3  empty  sacks, 
or  3  registered  cases  outside  of  a  sack,  as  equivalent  to 
1  sack.  This  equation  was  reached  after  extensive  tests  by 
ofFicers  of  the  Railway  Mail  Service  in  different  parts  of  the 
country  and  throughout  the  service,  from  which  it  was  found 
that  this  average  furnished  a  fair  measure  of  the  space 

122G9S— 19 89 


GIO 

occupied.  That  such  average  was  Hberal  to  tlie  railroads 
was  shown  by  the  subsecjuent  test,  the  results  of  which 
arc  set  forth  in  Post  Ollicc  Department  Exhibit  No.  61. 
These  tests  were  made  on  a  large  number  of  representative 
railway  post-oflPice  lines  and  show  that  an  average  of 
50.69  sacks  could  be  piled  in  3-foot  units  of  space  and  an 
average  of  116.43  sacks  could  be  piled  in  the  7-foot  units. 
However,  the  test  with  respect  to  the  number  of  pieces  that 
could  be  placed  m  a  sack  showed  that  the  original  estimate 
was  slightly  too  high. 

Considerable  testimony  was  submitted  at  the  hearing 
as  to  whether  it  is  practicable  to  accm-ately  authorize 
space  on  the  basis  of  the  count  of  sacks.  The  witnesses 
for  the  Department  showed  conclusively  that  it  is  entirely 
practicable  to  handle  closed-pouch  mails  in  the  units 
authorized  by  the  Department,  and  that  where  the  mails 
are  actually  carried  in  a  greater  floor  space  of  a  car  it  is 
for  the  convenience  of  the  railroads  and  not  necessary  for 
the  conduct  of  the  service.  In  the  actual  performance  of 
the  service  it  is  customary  for  the  railroads  to  place  the 
closed  pouches  in  a  convenient  position  on  the  floor  of 
the  car,  and  to  handle  them  substantially  as  they  handle 
baggage  matter  or  express  matter  when  carried  under 
similar  conditions.  If  the  railroads  desire  to  set  off  the 
space  by  removable  stanchions  it  would  be  entirely  agree- 
able to  the  Department.  However,  it  has  been  shown 
by  the  Department's  witnesses  that,  upon  the  average,  the 
authorization  of  space  is  more  than  adequate  for  the  pur- 
pose, and  under  these  circumstances  the  method  of  ascer- 
taining the  needed  space  appears  to  be  free  from  valid 
criticism. 

When,  during  the  test  period,  the  railroads  operated 
oversize  cars  (that  is,  full  railway  post  office  cars  of 
a  greater  size  than  the  authorized  unit,  or  apartments 
of  greater  length  than  the  authorized  unit),  and  stor- 
age-space authorizations  were  made  in  addition  to  the 
space  necessary  for  the  distribution  of  the  mails,  such 
storage  or  closed-pouch  mails  were  often  carried  in  the 
oversize  cars  so  operated.  In  this  manner  much  of  the 
excess  space  operated  by   the  railroads  during  the  test 


611 

period  in  connection  with  authorizations  of  distrihiition 
space  was  utilized  for  the  carriage  of  closed-pouch  and 
storage  mails.  (Abstract  of  Evidence — Closed-pouch  and 
Storagj-space,  pp.  132-137,  supra.) 

EMERGENCY-SPACE    UNITS. 

Specific  description  of  emergency-space  units  is  not 
found  in  the  language  of  the  act  of  1916.  It  is  a  service 
which,  is  implied,  and  the  means  of  taking  care  of  it, 
authorizirg  it,  and  pa5-irg  for  it  was  provided  for  by 
administrative  action.  The  emergency  authorizations  are 
designed  to  meet  emergencies,  as  the  term  implies,  and 
may  be  made  for  all  units  of  space,  including  the  full  storage 
car.  Full  railway  post-office  cars  or  apartment  cars  are  not 
authorized  as  emergency  units,  except  in  rare  instances. 
Emergency  authorizations  are  made  to  cover  the  trans- 
portation of  mails  which  can  not  be  cared  for  in  regular 
authorizations,  and  the  purpose  of  the  Department  in 
making  such  authorizations  is  to  provide  a  method  by 
which  the  railroads  may  be  paid  for  this  class  of  service, 
as  well  as  for  the  regular  authorizations,  in  order  that  no 
service  rendered  shall  be  performed  without  appropriate 
compensation. 

Tne  method  and  conditions  under  which  such  authoriza- 
tions are  made  are  described  by  witnesses  Knox,  Stone, 
Corridon,  Brauer,  and  Gaines,  for  the  Department. 

Wiien  mails  are  oh'ered  in  excess  of  the  amount  that  can 
be  carried  in  the  regular  authorizations  they  are  accepted 
by  the  employees  of  the  railroad,  if  there  be  sufficient 
room  in  the  consist  of  the  train,  and  the  space  allotted  to 
them  upon  which  payment  is  made  is  determined  by  a 
count  of  the  sacks  on  the  same  basis  as  applies  to  regular 
closed-pouch  and  storage-space  units.  Where  emergency 
mails  must  be  dispatched  and  there  is  no  room  in  the  con- 
sist of  the  train,  a  full  car  is  ordered  and  paid  for  if  the 
importance  and  quantity  of  the  mails  warrants  it.  In 
regular  authorizations  the  railroads  are  expected  and 
required  to  provide  such  space  as  may  be  necessary  for  the 


CI  2 

transportation  of  the  mails  regularly,  but  space  for  emer- 
gency authorizations,  less  than  full  cars,  is  never  required 
of  the  railroads  unless  the  requisite  space  can  be  found  in 
the  regular  consist  of  the  train. 

The  method  of  authorizing  the  emergency  space  diirers 
sliglitly  from  that  which  is  followed  in  the  authorization 
of  regular  closed-pouch  and  storage  units;  that  is,  in  the 
former  case  the  units  of  space,  3  and  7  feet,  may  be  com- 
bined, so  as  to  furnish  a  gradation  of  1  foot  in  the  authoriza- 
tions in  any  case  if  necessary  to  measure  the  amount  of 
service  rendered.  This  is  in  accordance  with  an  opinion 
of  the  Solicitor  for  the  Post  Ofhce  Department  as  to  the 
proper  construction  of  the  law  of  1916  and  referred  to  in 
the  testimony.  In  the  case  of  regular  authorizations  such 
combinations  have  not  been  made,  the  authorizations 
being  confined  to  the  units  severally  named  in  the  statute. 

The  Railroads  criticized  the  authorization  of  emergency 
units  by  these  combinations  of  3 , 7, 1 5,  and  30  feet,  but  it  was 
shown  b}'  the  Department's  witnesses,  first,  that  no  space  in 
the  trains  was  required  or  used  for  this  purpose  excepting 
space  which  the  railroads  were  running  in  the  usual  consist 
of  their  trains  and  which  presumably  would  not  have  been 
otherwise  utilized;  second,  that  the  method  was  a  device 
to  accurately  measure  the  service  actually  rendered  by  the 
railroads  in  order  that  they  might  be  c:xactly  paid  for  the 
same;  and,  third,  that  under  the  weight-basis  system  the 
additional  services  would  have  been  rendered  without  any 
additional  compensation  whatever,  unless  they  were  ren- 
dered during  a  weighing  period.  In  such  case  the  pay 
which  the  railroads  would  have  received  would  have  been 
ascertained  by  taking  the  weights  of  the  mails  on  and  off 
at  the  several  stations,  which  would  have  been  a  method 
of  ascertaining  the  extent  of  service  performed  under  the 
weight-basis  system  similar  to  the  combination  of  these 
units  under  the  space-basis  system  in  such  a  manner  as  to 
increase  or  decrease  the  authorizations  by  the  foot.  (Ab- 
stract of  Evidence — Emergency-Space  Units,  pp.  137-148, 
supra.) 


G13 

COUNT  OF  SACKS  AND  THE  PRACTICABLE  ALTERNATIVE. 

As  hereinbefore  stated,  the  method  of  ascertaining  tho 
space  to  be  authorized  for  closed-pouch  and  storage-spaco 
units  is  by  count  of  sacks  and  the  translation  of  such  count 
into  an  equivalency  of  linear  feet.  The  views  of  the  Depart- 
ment's witnesses  upon  this  subject  are  expressed  by  Wit- 
nesses Stone,  Gaines,  Kjiox,  and  Brauer,  and  are  set  forth 
in  the  Abstract  of  Evidence.  The  railroads  submitted 
considerable  amount  of  testimony  in  criticism  of  the  theory 
of  authorizing  space  on  this  basis.  The  troubles  in  connec- 
tion with  the  count  of  mail  sacks  were,  according  to  the 
Department's  witnesses,  greatly  magnified,  and  disputes 
over  such  counts  in  the  actual  performance  of  the  service 
are  not  a  serious  matter.  Witness  Searle  for  the  Railroads 
on  cross-examination  stated  that  if  the  Commission  shall 
find  that  the  count  is  the  proper  measure  of  the  space  such 
finding  will  probably  eliminate  all  controversy  in  regard 
to  it. 

The  Department's  witnesses  testified  that  if  some  plan 
could  be  devised  that  would  do  approximate  justice  to  tho 
Railroads  and  to  the  Department  and  eliminate  the  count 
of  sacks  it  would  be  a  desirable  alternative.  Tho  Depart- 
ment's proposed  plan  referred  to  hereinafter  accomplishes 
this  as  far  as  it  appears  to  be  practicable. 

One  practicable  alternative  of  such  count  is  the  separa- 
tion of  the  unit  spaces  of  3  and  7  feet  by  movable  stanchions. 
The  testimony  shows  that  this  is  entirely  practicable, 
and  that  while  the  Department  does  not  insist  upon  it  or 
recommend  it,  nevertheless,  if  the  Railroads  desire  to 
operate  the  service  in  that  manner,  there  will  be  no  objec- 
tion thereto.  (Abstract  of  Evidence — Count  of  Sacks  and 
Practicable  Alternative,  pp.  148-154,  sui^ra.) 

CARS    FOR    RAILWAY    POST-OFFICE    PURPOSES    SAME    UNDER 
WEIOIIT   AND    SPACE    SYSTEMS. 

A  great  deal  of  the  controversy  in  this  case  arises  over 
the  effect  upon  the  space  statistics  and  therefore  upon  the 
estimated  cost  or  revenue  per  unit  of  sei  vice,  of  the  opoa- 
tion  by  the  railroads  of  cars  of  greater  length  than  those 


authorized  by  the  Department.  One  of  the  main  objects 
of  the  space-basis  sjs'.em  is  to  authorize  the  space  neces- 
sary for  the  mail  service  in  such  units  as  to  not  require  of 
the  Raihoads  any  unnecessary  space  or  equipment  and 
to  limit  the  payment  for  transportation  facilities  to  only 
such  facilities  as  are  actually  necessary  for  the  purposes. 
To  this  end  Congress,  by  the  act  of  1916,  prescribed  certain 
car  unils,  the  same  being  60  feet  for  full  railway  post-office 
cars  and  full  storage  cars  and  30  feet  and  15  feet  for  railway 
post-office  apartments  in  cars. 

Following  the  passage  of  the  act  it  became  necessary, 
in  pursuance  of  its  inJcnt  and  provisions,  to  inaugurate 
the  space-basis  system  and  during  the  test  period  to  collect 
such  statistical  data  with  reference  to  the  operation  of 
space  as  would  enable  the  Department  to  show  the  advan- 
tages or  disadvantages  of  the  system  as  compared  with 
the  weight-basis  system,  and  the  Commission  to  deter- 
mine the  relative  me: its  of  the  two  systems  as  a  method 
of  gauging  railroad  mail  pay. 

It  was  not  practicable  before  such  test  period  for  the 
Railroads  to  transform  their  car  equipment  into  the  several 
unit  sizes  prescribed  in  the  statute,  nor  was  it  expected 
they  would  do  so.  It  is  shown  by  the  evidence  that  the 
railroads  did  not  so  regard  it  as  necessary  and  gave  instruc- 
tions to  the  operating  companies  that  such  changes  should 
not  be  made  pending  the  de'eimination  of  the  question 
by  the  Commission.  The  evidence  also  shows  that  the 
Department  did  not  expect  or  require  such  a  transformation 
of  equipment  during  that  period,  and  that  the  changes 
which  actually  occurred  with  reference  to  car  equipment, 
as  shown  by  Post  Office  Department  Exhibit  No.  3,  were 
only  such  changes  as  would  occur  in  the  reconstruction  of 
cars  during  normal  periods. 

The  result  was  that  when  the  service  was  changed  on 
November  1,  1916,  from  a  weight  basis  to  a  space  basis 
the  identical  car  equipment  which  the  Railroads  had 
operated  under  the  old  system  was  used  by  them  in  the 
pe.  formance  of  service  under  the  new  system.  That  was 
inevitable  and  could  not  have  been  avoided. 


615 

The  resjlt,  however,  was  the  opportunity  given  the 
Railroads  to  present  to  the  Commission  in  this  case  statis- 
tics based  upon  the  operation  of  space  in  excess  of  that 
required  under  such  system  for  the  carriage  of  the  mails, 
and  their  insistence,  in  opposition  to  the  contention  of  the 
Post  Office  Department,  that  the  entire  space,  not  only 
the  space  necessary  and  authorized  but  the  surplus  space 
in  the  oversize  cars,  should  be  charged  entirely  to  the 
mails. 

The  testimony  developed  the  additional  fact  which  the 
Dcpnrfment  insists  has  a  bearing  upon  the  case  and 
should  be  given  proper  weight  in  determining  the  issues. 
This  fact  is  that,  under  the  weight-basis  system,  it  was 
customary  for  the  railroads  to  build  and  operate  cars  of 
greater  length  than  those  authorized  by  the  Department  to 
meet  the  needs  of  the  service,  and  it  the:  ef ore  appears 
that,  while  the  railroads  are  seeking  to  charge  this  excess 
space  to  the  mails  in  this  case  where  space  is  the  gauge  of 
pay,  they  were  perfectly  willing  to  operate  the  same  excess 
space  under  the  weight-basis  system  where  they  were  leing 
compensated  on  the  basis  of  weight.  It  is  insisted  by  the 
Department  that  this  position  is  untenable  and  inconsistent; 
that  if  the  railroads  were  willing  to  operate  ove.size  cars 
under  the  weight-basis  system  for  a  standard  and  fixed 
rate  of  pay  which  was  not  influenced  thereby,  it  is  incon- 
sistent for  them  to  urge  in  this  case  that  special  considera- 
tion should  be  given  to  this  same  excess  space  and  a  rate 
of  pay  fLxed  upon  the  basis  of  its  gratuitous  operation. 
(Abstract  of  Evidence— Cars  for  Railway  Post  Office  Pur- 
poses, Same  under  Weight  and  Space  System,  pp.  155-163, 
supra.) 

OVERSIZE    CARS    A    DISADVANTAGE    TO    THE    MAIL     SERVICE. 

From  the  testimony  of  the  Department's  witnesses  it 
further  appears  that  the  operation  of  ove  size  cars  is  not 
an  advantage  to  the  miul  service.  In  fact  in  some  cases  it 
is  a  distinct  disadvantage,  as  where  a  60-foot  railway  post- 
office  car  is  run  for  the  convenience  of  the  railroad  com- 
pany in  satisfaction  of  a  30-foot  apartment  authorization 
in  which  one  clerk  is  employed;  this  increases  the  work 


616 

of  the  clerk.  It  further  appears  that  the  excess  distribution 
facilities  in  oversize  cars  are  nob  used  by  the  postal  clerks. 
There  is  always  ample  distiibution  facilities  in  the  space 
actually  authoiized,  and  it  is  no  advantage  to  the  service 
to  have  additional  facililies  for  distiibution,  as  the  lequiied 
facilities  fully  meet  all  the  needs  of  the  distiibution  scheme. 
(Abstract  of  Evidence — Oversize  Cars  a  Disadvantage, 
etc.,  p.  164,  supra.) 

EXCESS  IN  OVERSIZE  CARS  USED  MORE  ADVANTAGEOUSLY 
FOR  RAILROADS  UNDER  THE  SPACE-BASIS  SYSTEM  THAN 
UNDER    THE    WEIGHT-BASIS    SYSTEM. 

If,  however,  oversize  cars  are  to  be  operated  by  the 
Railroads  in  satisfaction  of  authorizations  of  lesser  size 
under  a  space-basis  system,  or  if  that  fact  is  to  be  given 
consideration  in  this  investigation,  then  it  appears  that 
such  operation,  while  no  advantage  to  the  Post  Office 
Department,  has  inured  to  the  advantage  of  the  railroad 
companies.  Prior  to  November  1,  1916,  when  the  routes 
in  question  were  placed  upon  a  space  basis,  the  excess 
space  in  oversize  cars  was  not  used  to  an  appreciable 
extent  for  carrying  storage  mails.  Under  that  system 
the  mails  were  carried  in  baggage  cars  and  were  handled 
by  railroad  employees.  Under  the  space-basis  system 
such  mails  being  carried  in  the  oversize  cars  are  handled 
by  the  postal  employees  and  the  railroad  employees  are 
relieved  of  such  handling.  The  only  advantage  the 
Department  derives  from  carrying  them  in  that  manner 
is  the  saving  of  the  terminal  charge.  Such  is  covered  by 
the  terminal  charge  applying  to  the  car  unit.  (Abstract  of 
Evidence — Excess  Space  in  Oversize  Cars  Used  More  Ad- 
vantageously for  Raikoads,  etc.,  pp.  165,  166,  supra.) 

RAILROADS      SHOUI.D      STANDARDIZE      POSTAL       CARS;     CON- 
VERTIBLE   CARS. 

The  problems  of  the  oversize  and  undersize  cars  should 
be  met  by  a  standardization  of  cars  used  for  distributing 
purposes  and  fuU  cars  for  storage  mails.  This  is  especially 
true  under  a  space-basis  system  and  would  be  equally 


G17 

advantageous  to  the  Railroads  under  the  weight-basis 
sj^stem  as  conducive  to  a  more  economical  operation. 
However,  it  might  be  that  the  Railroads  would  prefer  for 
their  own  purposes  to  construct  oversize  cars  to  some 
Extent  in  order  to  make  them  available  for  increases  in 
length  in  case  of  growth  of  the  service,  as  tliey  have  in  the 
past.  If  such  a  practice  could  find  warrant  in  the  econo- 
mies of  operation  considered  solely  from  the  railroad  point 
of  view,  the  excess  space  should  not  be  charged  against 
the  Department  as  a  consequence  thereof.  The  Depart- 
ment has  made  provision  for  the  ready  conversion  at  slight 
expense  of  one  size  car  unit  into  another.  This  has  been 
especially  covered  in  the  testimony  by  Post  Office  De- 
partment Exhibit  No.  89,  Memorandum  Relative  to 
Convertible  Cars.  (Abstract  of  Evidence— Railroads 
Should  Standardize  Cars;  Convertible  Cars,  pp.  lGG-168, 
supra.) 

Specific  Advantages  of  the  Space-Basis  System. 

ONLY  THE  service  SPECIFICALLY  AUTHORIZED  IS  REQUIRED 
OF  THE  RAILROADS,  AND  ALL  SERVICE  AUTHORIZED  AND 
PERFORMED    IS    PAID   FOR. 

The  space-basis  system  provides  a  definite  and  certain 
manner  of  determining  the  amount  of  compensation  due 
a  carrying  company  for  transporting  the  mails.  No  other 
plan  other  than  a  weighing  day  by  day  would  do  this 
and  such  a  weighing  is  wliolly  impracticable.  Only  the 
service  specifically  authorized  is  required  of  the  Railroads 
under  the  space-basis  system.  In  this  respect  it  differs 
materially  from  the  weight-basis  system.  Under  the 
latter  the  compensation  having  been  fixed  upon  a  statis- 
tical basis  of  weighing  to  continue  for  four  years  there 
was  no  special  consideration  given  to  the  facilities  re- 
quired of  the  Railroads  for  the  transportation  of  any 
mails  that  might  be  offered  during  the  quadrennial  term, 
aside  from  the  inspection  and  review  from  time  to  time 
of  the  necessities  for  distribution  space.  Unnecessary 
dispatches  of  closed  pouches  were  provided  for  under  the 


G18 

weight  system  because  it  did  not  take  into  consideration 
the  element  of  frequency  of  service  in  tlie  fixing  of 
pay.  The  autliorization  of  space  for  distribution  pur- 
poses in  apartment  cars  did  not  involve  anj^  additional 
or  increased  compensation  to  the  Railroads  for  increased 
space  or  increased  frequency  and  therefore  there  was  no 
economic  restraint  upon  the  Department  with  respect  to 
excessive  requirements  for  such  space. 

Under  the  space-basis  system  the  exact  opposite  of  this 
is  the  rule.  Both  frequency  and  space  are  directly  com- 
pensated for  in  the  amount  of  pay  allowed  for  the  service. 

The  result  of  this  is  that  under  the  space-basis  sys- 
tem all  service  authorized  and  performed  is  paid  for. 
The  additional  service  performed  by  the  Railroads  is 
directly  measured  by  the  authorizations  which  cover  every 
car-mile  of  operation,  representing  the  elements  of  space 
and  frequency,  and  such  measurement  carries  with  it  the 
appropriate  payment  therefor.  (Abstract  of  Evidence — 
Specific  Advantages,  etc.,  pp.  170,  172,  173,  174,  175, 
181,  supra.) 

IT    ENABLES    A    BETTER    CONTROL   OF   DISPATCHES    OF   MAILS 
AND    A    CLOSER    SUPERVISION    OF   THE    SERVICE. 

The  space-basis  system  necessitates  a  better  control  of 
dispatches  of  mails  and  a  closer  supervision  of  the  service. 
Tliis  results  fi'om  the  fact  that  its  successful  operation  and 
administration  requires  a  more  intimate  Iviiovledge  and 
intelligent  direction  of  the  details  of  the  service  by  those 
who  are  in  du'ect  charge  of  it.  Under  the  weight-basis 
system  no  increases  in  the  service  meant  increased  com- 
pensation to  the  carriers,  nor  did  decreases  in  the  service 
mean  saving  to  the  Department.  The  compensation 
having  been  fixed  and  become  static  for  four  years  there 
was  no  mcentive  on  the  part  of  the  Department  to  control 
or  direct  the  dispatches  of  the  mails  or  to  supervise  the 
service  in  all  the  details  in  a  manner  most  economical  to  the 
Department  and  the  Railroads.  Tlie  exact  opposite  of 
this  is  true  under  the  space-basis  system  and  gives  rise  to 


619 

the  necessity  for  the  better  control  and  supervision,  and  the 
testimony  of  the  witnesses  for  the  Department  is  to  the 
effect  that  this  is  the  actual  result  in  the  service.  (Abstract 
of  Evidence— Specific  Advantaj^es,  etc.,  pp.  169,  170,  187, 
supra.) 

IT   ENABLES   A  BETTER  ADJUSTIMENT   OF   SERVICE  TO   NEEDS 
AND    COST. 

Tlie  space-basis  system  makes  it  possible  for  the  Depart- 
ment to  make  adjustments  and  readjustments  of  the 
authorizations  of  service  to  correspond  accurately  to  the 
service  needs  and  also  to  a  commensurate  cost  for  the 
service  furnished  the  patrons  of  the  mails.  It  enables  the 
Department  not  onl}^  to  take  into  consideration  the  postal 
needs  in  makmg  authorizations  but  the  further  question 
as  to  whether  the  Department  is  receivms;  service  which 
is  entu'ely  commensurate  v.ith  the  expejiditure  involved. 
Under  the  weif-ht-basis  system  this  was  impracticable 
because  of  conditions  hereinbefore  stated.  (Abstract  of 
Evidence — Specific  Advantages,  etc.,  p.  171,  supra.) 

IT    ELIMINATES    THE    EXPENSE    OF   MAIL   WEIGHINGS. 

The  space-basis  system  dispenses  with  the  necessity  for 
the  periodic  weighines  of  the  mails  on  railroad  mail 
routes  and  therefore  elimmates  the  large  expense  involved 
therein.  Such  weighings  are  a  necessity  under  any  weight- 
basis  system.  It  has  long  been  contended  by  the  .Railroads 
that  quadrennial  weighings  are  too  infrequent  to  furnish  a 
proper  basis  for  the  adjustment  of  pay.  The  cost  of  even 
these  infrequent  weighings  is  very  heavy.  (Abstract  of 
Evidence — Specific  Advantages,  etc.,  p.  193,  supra.) 

Post  Office  Department  Exhibit  No.  19  sho.vs  that  the 
total  cost  of  the  last  four  quadrennial  weighings,  covering 
all  the  service,  was  $1,088,619.49.  As  these  weighings 
(except  to  cover  the  small  weight  routes)  are  mmecessary 
under  the  space-basis  system,  this  amount  is  saved  to  the 


620 

public.  The  cost  of  the  wciphino;  on  the  routes  still  remain- 
ing on  a  weight  basis  in  the  foiiith  section  was  $7,000. 
(Exhibit  No.  19.)  Estimating  the  other  sections  at  the 
same  ratio,  the  cost  of  four  years'  weighings  on  the  weight 
routes  will  be  approximately  S27,735. 

IT    CONSERVES    CAR    EQUIPMENT. 

The  space-basis  system  conserves  car  equipment  to  an 
extent  impracticable  under  any  other  system.  This  is  a 
necessary  result  as  compensation  is  fixed  upon  car  space 
as  one  of  the  two  principal  elements — space  and  frequency. 
Therefore,  the  economical  administration  of  the  service, 
which  is  a  necessary  result  of  a  space-basis  system  under  all 
the  safeguards  which  surround  the  expenditure  of  public 
moneys  under  normal  conditions,  will  result  in  the  mini- 
mum reciuisitions  upon  the  Kailroads  for  car  equipment. 
This  has  been  strikingly  illustrated  in  the  experience  under 
the  space-basis  system  as  shown  by  Post  Office  Department 
Exhibit  No.  15.  (Abstract  of  Evidence — Specific  Advan- 
tages, etc.,  pp.  169,  177,  188,  189,  swpra.) 

IT  SATISFACTORILY  COMPENSATES  THE  RAILROADS  FOR 
UNUSUAL  VARIATIONS  IN  THE  VOLUME  OF  MAILS  AND 
FOR    ALL    EMERGENCY   MAILS. 

The  space-basis  system  not  only  provides  for  adequately 
compensating  the  .Railroads  for  mails  carried  under  regular 
and  constant  authorizations  subject  to  review  and  restate- 
ment from  time  to  time  as  the  needs  of  the  service  may 
require,  but  it  also  provides  a  certain  method  of  compen- 
sating them  for  all  unusual  variations  in  the  volume  of  the 
mails,  and  for  all  usual  fluctuations  and  emergency  mails 
in  excess  of  the  usual  volume. 

Unusual  variations  may  arise  from  any  special  causes 
which  result  in  diversions  of  mails  from  their  regular  route, 
or  from  conditions  which  tend  to  produce  increased  volume 
of  mails.  Tlie  war  conditions  of  the  past  tliree  years, 
including  the  establishment  of  large  camps  and  the  dis- 
patch of  mails  to  the  soldiers  overseas,  produced  such 


G21 

variations  in  the  usual  flow  of  the  mails.  Under  the 
wei,s;ht-basis  system  these  fluctuations  were  not  repre- 
sented by  any  increases  in  pay  to  the  .Railroads  upon  whom 
the  duty  of  transportation  devolved,  nor  by  decreases  in 
pay  where  diversions  occurred  from  the  carryino;  lines. 

Great  floods  which  occur  annually  in  some  sections  of  the 
country  completely  suspending  railroad  traffic  upon  many 
lines  and  causing;  considerable  diversions  of  mails  to  lines 
not  affected,  result  in  decreasing  and  sometimes  entirely 
eliminating  the  service  performed  where  authorized  and 
devolving  such  performance  upon  other  roads  where  such 
mails  have  not  theretofore  been  carried.  Such  changes  in 
the  performance  of  service  were  inadequately  met  by  the 
weight-basis  system. 

Emergency  mails  may  represent  in  the  main  the  gradual 
growth  of  the  service  as  expressed  in  increased  volume. 
This  element  was  wholly  uncompensated  for  under  the 
weight-basis  system  until  another  weighing  was  had. 

Under  the  space-basis  system  the  opposite  of  this  is  true. 
All  unusual  variations  m  the  volume  of  mails  arising  from 
whatever  causes  are  directly  and  adequately  cared  for  by 
the  specific  authorizations,  and  no  mails  are  carried  upon 
any  road  as  a  result  of  such  variation  without  compensa- 
tion at  the  rates  authorized  for  regular  service.  (Abstract 
of  Evidence — Specific  Advantages,  etc.,  pp.  17G,  177, 
supra.) 

IT      ENABLES      THE      DEPARTMENT      TO      ADMINISTER      THE 
SERVICE    MORE    ECONOMICALLY. 

The  space-basis  system  enables  the  Department  to 
administer  the  service  with  greater  economy  than  is 
possible  under  the  weight-basis  system. 

It  is  possible  under  this  system  to  effect  a  larger  saving 
in  car  space  than  would  be  practicable  under  a  weight- 
basis  system,  where  no  incentive  exists  for  such  economy. 

It  results  in  the  consolidtition  of  loads  and  thus  releases 
space  in  storage  cars,  wIik  h  turns  back  to  the  railroads 
many  full  storage  cars  for  their  use  other^^ise. 


622 

It  has  been  possible  under  this  system  to  provide  for 
the  transportation  of  post-oflice  supplies,  much  empty  mail 
equipment,  and  blue-tag  mails  (certain  periodical  matter) 
in  space  that  has  been  authorized  and  paid  for,  but  in 
which  no  mails  would  be  otherwise  carried  upon  the  return 
movements  of  the  cars.  Under  the  weight-basis  system 
such  supplies,  empty  equipment,  and  blue- tag  mails  were 
transported  in  fast  freight  trains  and  paid  for  at  regular 
freight  rates.  By  utilizing  the  space  that  is  already  paid 
for  under  the  space-basis  system  the  Department  saves 
the  expenditure  which  would  otherwise  be  made  for  freight 
and  the  railroads  have  tmned  back  to  them  by  the  De- 
partment tlie  space  in  their  freight  trains  M-hich  would  be 
otherwise  used  for  such  transportation. 

Under  the  weight-basis  system  blue-tag  mails  (certain 
mail  matter  of  the  second  class  transported  under  the 
weight-basis  system  in  fast  freight  trains),  empty  mail  bags, 
stamped  paper,  and  postal  cards  (suppUes  for  the  public) 
were  shipped  betw^een  certain  points  by  freight  and  their 
transportation  paid  for  at  regular  freight  rates.  These 
shipments  of  blue- tag  mails  mostly  moved  in  one  gen- 
eral direction  from  the  east  toward  the  west  and  south- 
west. For  the  empty  equipment  the  movement  was 
generally  the  reverse  of  the  general  movement  of  the  mails. 
The  result  was  that  the  same  amount  of  space  was  not 
needed  nor  used  in  both  general  directions  for  the  move- 
ment of  the  mails,  and  considerable  space  occupied  for 
mail  purposes  in  one  direction  was  returned  in  the  opposite 
direction  empty. 

With  the  inauguration  of  the  space-basis  system  under 
which  space  in  distributing  and  storage  cars  used  in  the  one 
direction  is  paid  for  in  the  opposite  direction,  it  was  pos- 
sible to  divert  these  blue-tag  mails,  empty  equipment  and 
supplies  from  the  freight  cars  and  dispatch  them  in  the 
mail-car  space  which  would  otherwise  return  empty. 

This  resulted  in  economies  to  both  the  railroads  and  the 
Department.  It  released  freight  cars  and  freight  space 
to  the  railroads  for  railroad  purposes,  and  saved  to  the 
Department  the  freight  charges  paid  when  the  matter 
moved  in  freight  trains. 


G23 

PostOfRce  Department  Exhibit  No.  14  shows  that  during 
the  two-year  period  ended  October  31,  1918,  9,100  cars 
of  this  matter,  weighing  227,417,144  pomids,  were  carried 
in  otherwise  empty  storage  cars  without  additional  cost 
(the  movement  in  both  directions  being  paid  for  to  the 
railroads  under  the  space-basis  system). 

The  estimated  cost  of  this  trahsportation  by  freight  was 
$1,327,933.78,  which  was  saved  to  the  Department.  This 
was  an  actual  saving  to  the  Department  because  this 
amount  would  have  been  paid  in  freight  charges  if  the 
articles  had  been  carried  in  freight  cars,  and  no  additional 
cost  was  involved  when  carried  in  the  empty  storage  cars, 
as  their  movement  would  have  been  paid  for  if  returned 
empty. 

The  transportation  of  mail  equipment  in  this  manner 
results  in  a  further  advantage  to  the  Department,  in  that 
it  is  released  from  transit  at  an  earlier  date  than  when 
transported  by  freight  and  is  ready  again  for  inclosing 
mails  for  transportation.  This  means  that  less  mai]  equip- 
ment must  be  provided  l:)y  the  Department  to  handle  the 
mails  than  would  otherwise  be  necessar3'. 

Under  the  space-basis  system  a  less  number  of  postal 
clerks  are  necessary  to  man  the  railway  post-office  lines 
than  would  be  otherwise  required.  This  results  from  the 
fact  that  the  distribution  of  mails  of  some  classes  is  made 
in  terminal  railway  post-offices  instead  of  in  the  cars, 
without  detriment  to  the  service.  (Abstract  of  Evidence — 
Specific  Advantages,  etc.,  pp.  184,  185,  186,  187,  192,  193, 
194,  supra.) 

IT  HARMONIZES   WITH  THE   FULLER    USE    OF  THE    TERMINAL 
RAILWAY   POST-OFFICES. 

The  space-basis  system  has  made  it  advantageous  to 
develop  to  a  greater  extent  the  terminal  railway  post-of- 
fices. These  are  postal  institutions  situated  at  large  cen- 
ters of  distribution,  and  in  which  certain  classes  of  mails 
are  distributed  and  placed  in  sacks  and  labeled  for  proper 
destinations  before  deli^-ery  to  the  railroads  for  transporta- 


(•)24 

tion.  The  terminal  railway  post-olfices  were  in  existence 
before  the  space-basis  system  was  instituted,  but  their 
fuller  use  has  enabled  a  more  economical  authorization  of 
distributinfi:  space  in  the  railway  post-office  cars.  (Abstract 
of  Evidence — Specific  Advantages,  etc.  pp.  189,  190, 
swpra.) 

IT  WILL  STANDARDIZE  CAR  UNITS  FOR  THE  MAILS  AND  GIVE 
RISE    TO    OTHER    ADVANTAGES. 

If  the  space-basis  system  of  payment  shall  be  authorized, 
it  will  tend  to  standardize  car  units  used  for  the  transporta- 
tion of  the  mails,  which  will  be  a  distinct  advantage  to  the 
mail  service  and  to  the  Railroads. 

Other  advantages  have  been  apparent,  such  as  oflfering 
greater  incentive  to  the  Railroads  to  furnish  cars  under 
such  a  system  than  under  the  weight-basis  system  for  the 
reason  that  Railroads  understand  that  all  facilities  fur- 
nished will  be  directly  paid  for. 

Under  such  system  the  Railroads  have  an  incentive  to 
make  and  maintain  good  mail  schedules.  This  was  not 
true  under  the  weight-basis  system. 

Under  such  system  there  is  a  greater  degree  of  coopera- 
tion between  the  Railroads  and  the  Department  in  ef- 
fecting readjustments  of  service. 

Under  such  a  system  more  storage  mails  are  handled  in 
the  mail  distributing  cars  than  were  so  handled  under  the 
weight-basis  system,  thus  relieving  the  railroad  employees 
of  such  duty. 

Under  this  system  there  has  been  a  much  closer  super- 
vision of  the  service  by  employees  of  the  Railway  Mail 
Service  than  was  the  case  under  the  weight-basis  sj^stem. 
This  has  had  the  effect  not  only  of  securing  better  and  more 
economical  service,  but  the  responsibility  thus  devolved  upon 
the  field  force  has  had  a  beneficial  effect  on  the  personnel. 
(Abstract  of  Evidence — Specific  Advantages,  etc.,  pp.  179, 
180,  183,  184,  190,  191,  192,  194,  195,  196,  supra.) 


625 

IT      RECOGNIZES      FREQUENCY      OF      SERVICE,      WHICH      WAS 
ENTIRELY    IGNORED    BY   THE    WEIGHT-BASIS    SYSTEM. 

Under  the  space-basis  system  the  element  of  frequency 
of  service  is  given  its  proper  weight  and  value  in  stating 
the  pay  for  the  service  performed.  Tliis  feature  was 
entirely  ignored  m  the  weight-basis  system  so  far  as  com- 
pensation based  upon  weight  was  concerned,  and  was 
only  partially  recognized  in  the  payment  for  full  railway 
post-ofhce  cars,  the  rate  for  the  same  bemg  based  upon 
a  round  trip  a  day.  The  space-basis  system  takes  mto 
account  the  frequency  of  service  performed  by  every 
unit  of  space  authorized,  the  pay  being  based  upon  the 
actual  miles  of  travel.  Ileference  will  be  made  again 
hereinafter  to  this  featm-e.  (Abstract  of  Evidence — Specific 
Advantages,  etc.,  p.  180,  supra.) 

Space-basis     Systesi     Practicable,     Equitable,     and 
Satisfactory. 

The  witnesses  for  the  Post  Office  Department  estab- 
lished the  fact  that  the  space-basis  system  is  entirely 
practicable,  and  the  evidence  shows  that  it  is  equitable. 
Suggestions  were  made  with  respect  to  certam  modifica- 
tions in  the  plan  and  its  application,  and  testimony  was 
submitted  to  the  effect  that  with  such  changes  there 
would  be  no  difficulties  in  its  admmistration.  Witnesses 
for  the  Railroads  testified  that  with  respect  to  the  admin- 
istration the  controversies  presented  in  the  testimony 
relate  to  differences  of  opinion  as  to  whether  the  Post 
Office  Department  orders  conform  to  reasonably  efficient 
train  operation,  but  that  such  dift'ercnces  of  opmion  are 
minor  matters  that  will  undoubtedly  be  straightened  out; 
and  that  if  the  Commission  decides  that  the  space-basis 
system  in  some  form  should  be  continued  it  would  be 
entirely  practicable  for  a  common  basis  of  operation  to 
be  determined  upon  between  the  Railroads  and  the 
Department  under  the  advice  of  the  Interstate  Commerce 
Commission.     Jiailroad    witnesses    further    testified    that 

122698—19 40 


if  the  spaco-basis  could  be  made  a  fair  mcasui-e  of  value 
the  .Railroads'  chief  objection  would  be  removed.  So 
far  as  the  Department  is  concerned  the  testimony  of  its 
witnesses  shows  that  the  system  is  entirely  satisfactory 
to  the  Department. 

It  may  be  noted  here  that  before  the  passage  of  the 
act  of  1916,  and  in  the  representations  made  before  the 
congressional  joint  conmiission  hearing  testimony  pre- 
vious to  reportmg  the  space-basis  bill,  the  railroad  repre- 
sentatives expressed  opposition  to  any  space-basis  system 
because  of  the  apprehension  that  there  would  be  great 
diversions  of  express  and  freight  to  the  parcel  post  mails. 
The  testimony  in  this  hearmg  shows,  however,  that  that 
fear  has  not  been  realized.  (Abstract  of  Evidence — Specific 
Advantages,  etc.,  p.  178;  Space-Basis  System  Practicable, 
etc.,  pp.  197,  198-203,  supra.) 

Operation  of  Service  Substantially  the  Same  on 
November  1,  1916,  Under  Space-Basis  System  as 
Theretofore  Under  Weight-Basis  System. 

Hereinbefore  it  has  been  noted  that  under  the  author- 
izations of  service  under  the  space-basis  system  the  same 
cars  were  used  for  service  by  the  Railroads  as  had  been 
in  operation  under  the  weight-basis  system.  The  result 
was  that  on  November  1,  1916,  when  the  space-basis  system 
became  effective,  the  cars  in  operation  mcluded  all  the 
surplus  space  in  the  cars  (oversize  cars)  which  had  been 
in  use  under  the  weight-basis  system. 

In  accordance  with  the  purpose  of  the  act  of  1916 
authorizing  the  space-basis  system,  the  Department  began  as 
soon  as  practicable  after  November  1,  1916,  to  restate 
the  service  on  the  basis  of  the  space  actually  needed  for 
the  mails.  This  resulted  in  reductions  in  authorizations. 
The  effect  of  these  orders  in  the  reduction  in  space  and 
consequently  in  pay  to  the  Railroads  have  been  stated 
in  the  Post  Office  Department  exhibits  and  have  been 
referred  to  hereinbefore.  (Abstract  of  Evidence— Opera- 
tion of  Service  Substantially  the  Same  on  Nov.  1,  1916, 
etc.,  pp.  204,  205,  supra.) 


627 

PAYiNfENTS  Under  Space-Basis  System. 

Pa\Tiients  to  the  Railroads  for  the  performance  of  serv- 
ice under  the  space-basis  system  are  made  promptly. 
As  a  rule  certification  is  made  to  the  auditor  of  approxi- 
mately 100  per  cent  of  the  service  as  represented  by  the 
statements  upon  the  books  of  the  Department  on  the 
25th  of  each  month.  Upon  this  certification  the  accounts 
are  audited  and  the  checks  mailed  promptly  to  the  Rail- 
roads. All  this  is  done  in  advance  of  the  receipt  of  the 
affidavits  of  performance  of  service  furnished  by  the 
Railroads.  The  final  adjustments  are  made  upon  receipt 
of  such  affidavits.  If  the  100  per  cent  has  been  too  much, 
a  readjustment  is  made  by  a  suitable  deduction  in  the 
following  month.  The  purpose  of  this  method  is  to  insure 
prompt  payment  to  the  Railroads  for  all  service  per- 
formed. Tliis  covers  all  service,  excepting  emergency 
service,  which,  dui'ing  the  statistical  period,  amounted 
to  about  2.81  per  cent  of  the  aggregate  pay.  Adjustments 
for  this  service  are  made  upon  the  affidavits  of  perform- 
ance of  service,  and  under  the  circumstances  can  not  be 
made  as  prompth'  as  adjustments  for  the  regularly 
authorized  service. 

It  is  interesting  to  note  that  approximately  90  per  cent 
of  the  payments  made  to  the  Railroads  represent  service 
stated  and  paid  for  in  both  directions,  and  that  approxi- 
matel}'  50  per  cent  of  emergency  space  is  paid  for  in  both 
directions. 

Payments  made  for  emergency  service  represent  the 
thoroughness  with  which  the  administration  of  the  space 
basis  has  been  adapted  to  a  plan  insuring  payment  for  all 
services  rendered.  It  might  be  said  that  a  weight-basis 
system  could  approximate  a  fah  average  compensation  for 
the  service;  but,  nevertheless,  it  would  never  equal  the 
exactness  with  which  a  space-basis  system  insures  com- 
plete payment  for  all  service  regularly  authorized.  The 
space-basis  system  has  the  adcUtional  advantage  of  insur- 
ing exact  pay  for  all  the  fluctuations  of  the  mails  which  are 
uncarcd  for  by  the  regular  authorizations,  and  this  is  done 
by  payments  for  emergenc}^  service.  (Abstract  of  Evi- 
dence— Payments  under  Space-Basis  System,  pp.  205-210, 
supra.) 


628 

Some  FeatitxEs  of  Uailkoads'  Perfoemance  of  Mail 
Sekvice. 

The  Railroads  presented  testimony  for  the  pm-pose  of 
showing  onerous  conditions  with  respect  to  handhng  mails 
at  night  at  local  railroad  stations,  the  stopping  of  trains  for 
parcel  post,  and  the  piling  of  mail  in  closed-pouch  units. 

The  Department's  testimony  showed  that  these  conditions 
are  not  exacting  or  burdensome  and  that  the  Department 
cooperates  with  the  Railroads  in  such  a  manner  as  to  facili- 
tate the  exchange  of  mails  with  the  least  inconvenience  to 
the  companies.  The  Railroads  are  allowed  to  maintain 
boxes  at  stations  in  which  the  trainmen  may  place  the  mails 
or  take  the  mails  from  them  when  trains  pass  at  night. 
Under  certain  circumstances  arrangements  are  made  for 
carrying  the  mails  past  stations  during  the  night  and  retm-n- 
ing  them  upon  day  trains,  in  order  that  they  may  be 
handled  by  the  day  stationmen. 

With  respect  to  the  practice  of  piling  mails  in  closed- 
pouch  units,  the  testimony  shows  that  such  mails  may  be 
piled  in  the  space  allotted,  as  a  general  rule,  without  serious 
inconvenience  to  the  trainmen  in  the  matter  of  delivering 
them  at  the  stations.  It  is  shown  that  railway  postal  clerks 
handle  the  pouches  which  are  piled  in  the  distributing  cars 
in  space  as  restricted  as  the  authorized  units  of  space  in 
baggage  cars,  in  the  same  manner  as  would  be  required  of  the 
trainmen  if  they  chose  to  pile  the  pouches  in  the  baggage 
car  in  the  authorized  space,  and  without  difhculty.  The 
testimony  shows,  however,  that,  for  the  convenience  of  the 
trainmen  themselves,  the  pouches  are  often  scattered  over 
the  iloor  of  the  baggage  car,  piled  on  the  baggage  or  with 
express  matter  and  handled  as  baggage  and  express  are 
handled.  (Abstract  of  Evidence— Some  Features  of  Rail- 
roads' Performance,  etc.,  pp.  210-216,  supra.) 


Railroad  Mail  Sekvice  Considered  Desirable  by  the 
Railroads. 

The  testimony  shows  that  the  Raih-oads  have  generally 
considered  the  establishment  and  maintenance  of  railroad 
mail  service  on  their  lines  as  desirable.  As  a  general  rule 
railroads  have  been  anxious  to  have  mail  service  authorized 
over  their  lines,  and  when  new  pieces  of  track  have  been  con- 
structed and  are  read}^  for  o])eration,  immediate  applica- 
tions for  mail  service  over  the  same  have  been  received  by 
the  Department.  (Abstract  of  Evidence — Railroad  Mail 
Service  Considered  Desirable,  etc.,  p.  220,  ■'■upra.) 

Service  Requirements  and  Conditions, 
railway  post-office  car  service. 

The  Department's  witnesses  have  described  in  detail  the 
character  of  the  cars  fm-nished,  the  manner  of  their  equip- 
ment for  the  distribution  of  mails,  and  the  services  per- 
formed by  the  railway  postal  clerks  in  the  distribution  and 
handling  of  mails  in  this  class  of  cars. 

These  cars  are  what  are  kno\ni  as  distributing  cars — that 
is,  they  are  constructed  and  fitted  up  suitably  for  the  dis- 
tribution of  the  mails  en  route.  They  are  traveling  post 
offices.  Under  the  provisions  of  the  statute  of  1916  they 
are  of  three  prescribed  units,  the  60-foot  full  car,  the  30-foot 
apartment,  and  the  15-foot  apartment. 

All  services  in  full  railway  post-office  cars,  with  the  excep- 
tion in  some  instances  of  the  piling  of  mail  at  the  initial  point 
or  delivery  at  the  terminal  point,  are  performed  by  rail- 
way postal  clerks.  '  These  services  consist  in  the  receipt, 
distribution,  and  delivery  of  mails  in  transit  between 
termini.  All  classes  of  mail  are  handled  and  distributed 
by  the  clerks,  but  parcel  post  and  cu-cular  mails  are  not 
distributed  to  any  great  extent  in  such  cai-s.  Such  mails 
are  generally  made  up  in  railway  post-office  terminals  and 
the  sacks  and  pouches  containing  same  are  carried  tlu-ough 
intact.  The  working  mails  received  in  bulk  in  pouches  and 
sacks    are   opened    and    the  contents  separated   and   dis- 


630 

tributcd  by  the  clerks  to  smaller  units  for  delivery  to  post 
offices  located  on  the  line,  to  other  post  offices,  or  to  con- 
necting railway  post-office  lines. 

In  the  distributing  cars  mails  for  distribution  en  route, 
registered  mail,  and  made-up  mails  for  local  deliveries  along 
the  line,  are  generally  stored. 

The  service  in  the  apartment  cars  is  practically  the  same 
as  the  service  in  the  full  cars. 

Special  reference  is  made  to  the  detailed  evidence  of  the 
Department's  witnesses  hereinbefore.  (Abstract  of  Evi- 
dence— Service   Requirements,  etc.,  pp.  221-228,  suj^ra.) 

STORAGE-CAR   AND    STORAGE-SPACE    SERVICE. 

The  Department's  witnesses  have  described  in  detail  the 
storage-car  services  rendered  in  connection  with  the  trans- 
portation and  handling  of  made-up  mails  in  bulk.  It  is 
service  that  may  be  performed  either  in  a  car  fitted  up 
with  movable  stanchions  providing  for  a  number  of  stalls 
or  compartments  or  in  an  ordinary  baggage  or  express  car 
not  provided  w4th  stalls  or  special  facilities  for  making 
separations.  The  cars  so  used  are  built  and  furnished  by 
the  raih'oad  companies,  and,  as  a  rule,  the  Department  has 
not  exercised  supervision  or  control  over  their  construc- 
tion and  accepts  any  cars  offered  by  the  Railroads  which 
meet  the  needs  of  transportation.  They  are  operated  over 
comparatively  few  lines,  and  those  are  generally  transconti- 
nental or  other  lines  where  there  is  a  heavy  movement  of 
through  mails. 

Full  storage  cars  are  loaded  by  railroad  employees  at 
the  initial  point  and  unloaded  at  the  terminal  point  by 
such  employees  under  the  supervision  of  railway  postal 
clerks  or  transfer  clerks.  The  handling  of  mails  in  these 
storage  cars  en  route,  however,  is  generally  performed  by 
railway  postal  clerks. 

The  mails  in  the  full  storage  cars,  excepting  those  loaded 
to  go  through  to  the  outward  terminal,  are  loaded  at  the 
initial  terminal  in  such  a  manner  as  to  facilitate  the  un- 
loading en  route.  At  local  stations  and  junction  points 
postal  clerks  enter  the  cars  and  deliver  the  mails  to  the 


631 

railroad  employees  on  the  station  platform.  The  service 
in  storage  space  (that  is,  storage  space  less  than  full  car) 
is  practically  the  same  class  of  service  as  in  the  full  storage 
car.  It  is  performed  in  units  of  less  than  60  feet.  It  con- 
sists in  the  handhng  of  made-up  mails  in  part  of  a  baggage  or 
express  car,  the  remainder  of  the  car  being  devoted  to  one 
or  both  of  those  services.  Storage-space  units  are  usually, 
though  not  always,  operated  in  connection  with  full  rail- 
way post-office  car  or  apartment-car  service,  and  carry  the 
made-up  mails  wliich  requu'e  no  distribution  en  route,  and 
in  some  cases  carry  mails  for  distribution  which  may  be 
transferred  from  the  baggage  car  to  the  postal  car  in 
transit. 

Mails  carried  in  3,  7,  and  15  foot  storage  units  are  car- 
ried in  such  manner  in  the  car  as  may  suit  the  convenience 
of  the  railroad  and  its  employees;  that  is,  the  Depart- 
ment does  not  require  that  they  shall  be  stacked  up  and 
confmed  to  any  prescribed  limits,  it  being  no  concern  of 
the  Department  how  the  mails  shall  be  carried,  pro- 
vided it  does  not  entail  uneconomical  administration  of 
the  service. 

The  raih-oad  employees  separate  the  pouches  upon  the 
floor  of  the  baggage  car  in  such  a  manner  as  to  facilitate 
their  dehvery  at  the  stations.  As  a  rule  this  does  not  re- 
quire any  greater  knowledge  upon  the  part  of  the  train- 
men than  is  required  to  handle  express  matter. 

Keference  is  had  to  the  detailed  description  of  this 
service  by  the  Department's  witnesses.  (Abstract  of  Evi- 
dence— Storage-Car  and  Storage-Space  Service,  pp.  228-241, 
supra.) 

CLOSED-POUCII    SERVICE. 

The  Department's  witnesses  have  described  in  detail  the 
the  services  performed  in  connection  witli  the  carriage  of 
closed-pouch  mails. 

Closed-pouch  service  is  the  transportation  and  handling 
of  made-up  mails  in  baggage  cars  on  trains  upon  whicli  no 
full  or  apartment  railway  post-office  cars  are  authorized. 
This  service  is  in  the  hands  of  the  railroads'  employees, 
who  load,  handle,  and  deliver  the  mails.    The  mails  are  of 


all  classes,  letter  pouches,  paper  sacks,  parcel-post  pack- 
ages, and  sometimes  registered  mail.  The  units  of  service 
authorized  are  7  feet  and  8  feet,  both  sides  of  the  car. 

The  service  required  of  baggagemen  in  liandling  closed 
pouches  is  not  complicated  and  it  does  not  require  expert 
knowledge.  Such  services  consist  in  piling  the  pouches 
upon  the  floor  or  with  baggage  and  express  matter  in 
convenient  shape  for  delivery  at  the  stations  en  route. 
There  is  cooperation  whenever  possible  by  the  railway 
postal  clerks  and  transfer  clerks,  who  give  needful 
assistance  to  baggagemen  in  this  work.  The  knowledge 
required  by  baggagemen  for  these  duties  is  no  greater  than 
that  necessary  for  the  handling  of  express,  and  the  mails 
are  handled  in  much  the  same  manner  as  baggage  and  ex- 
press are  handled  in  the  same  cars. 

There  is  no  difference  between  the  manner  in  which  the 
baggagemen  are  required  to  handle  closed  pouches  and 
storage  mails  under  the  space-basis  system  and  under  the 
weight-basis  system.    The  practice  is  identically  the  same. 

Special  reference  is  made  to  the  testimony  of  the  Depart- 
ment's witnesses.  (Abstract  of  Evidence — Service  Re- 
quirements, etc.,  pp.  241-252,  supra.) 

TRANSFER    CLERKS    SUPERVISE    DISPATCH    OF    MAILS. 

Special  provisions  are  made  by  the  Department  for  as- 
sisting railroad  employees  in  the  handling  of  mails  re- 
ceived at  large  terminals  for  dispatch  by  train.  In- 
stances of  such  are  found  at  points  where  the  large  mail- 
order houses  have  established  depots  or  department 
plants  and  make  up  large  quantities  of  merchandise  for 
delivery  to  the  postal  service.  The  Department  maintains 
corps  of  clerks  at  such  plants  for  the  purpose  of  distribu- 
ting the  mails,  and  the  mails  come  to  the  stations  in  large 
vans  for  the  various  dispatches.  The  Department  main- 
tains transfer  clerks  on  tlie  station  platforms.  When  the 
trucks  arrive  with  the  mails,  they  are  handled  under  the 
direct  supervision  and  active  assistance  of  tliese  transfer 
clerks.  (Abstract  of  Evidence — Service  Requirements, 
etc.,  pp.  252-253,  supra.) 


LOADING    AND    UNLOADING    OF    MAILS. 

Mails  received  into  a  railway  post-oflice  car  are  generally 
loaded  into  the  car  by  the  railway  postal  clerks.  Those 
received  into  the  full  storage  and  baggage  cars  are  handled 
by  the  railroad  employees.  The  piling  of  the  mails  in  60- 
foot  storage  cars  is  done  b}"  the  railroad  employees,  but 
generall}"  supervised  by  the  railway  mail  clerks.  The  un- 
loading of  the  storage  cars  is  done  on  some  roads  by  rail- 
road employees  and  on  other  roads  the  unloading  at  local 
stations  en  route  is  done  by  railway  postal  clerks,  who  also 
load  the  mails  into  the  storage  cars  under  the  same  condi- 
tions. (Abstract  of  Evidence — Service  Requirements,  etc., 
pp.  253-255,  ftupra.) 

SIDE    AND   TERMINAL    MESSENGER    SERVICE. 

The  Post  OfRce  Department  maintains  contract  service 
known  as  screen-wagon  service  and  mail-messenger  service 
for  the  carriage  of  the  mails  betAveen  railroad  stations  and 
post  offices.  There  are  about  8,600  offices  at  which  mail- 
messenger  service  is  so  employed.  Where  such  service  is 
maintained  by  the  Department  it  relieves  the  railroads  en- 
tirel}'  from  handling  the  mails  between  stations  and  post 
offices  and  from  making  transfers  between  the  railroad 
stations.  This  service,  together  \nth  Government  owned 
and  operated  automobile  and  wagon  service  in  cities,  car- 
ries 90  per  cent  of  all  the  mails  transported  between  rail- 
road stations  and  post  offices. 

At  the  55  largest  offices  in  the  United  States  producing 
S195,000,000  revenue  in  a  total  postal  revenue  of  S344,000,- 
000,  the  Post  Office  Department  takes  entire  care  of  the 
transportation  of  the  mails  between  the  railroad  stations 
and  the  post  offices.  In  addition  to  this  the  Department 
maintains  screen-wagon  service  at  208  of  the  next  larger 
offices,  which  produce  $50,000,000  of  the  gross  receipts. 
In  addition  to  these  the  Department  handles  all  the  mails 
between  the  depots  and  the  post  offices  at  about  8,600 
other  points. 


634 

Under  certain  conditions  set  fortli  in  the  Postal  Laws 
and  Regulations  (Post  OfTice  Department  Exhibit  No.  1, 
sec.  1346),  railroad  companies  are  required  to  carry  the 
mails  between  stations  and  post  offices  on  their  lines  at 
other  points  than  those  above  indicated.  The  mails  in- 
volved are  about  10  per  cent  of  the  total  volume  of  mails 
transported.  This  practice  is  of  long  standing.  Under 
the  old  contract  star  route  and  steamboat  S3^stems  the 
contractor  was  required  to  deliver  the  mails  into  the  post 
offices  and  take  them  from  post  offices  along  their  routes 
or  within  80  rods  of  their  landings.  As  the  railroad  service 
superseded  these  old  forms  of  contract  service  the  condi- 
tions existing  under  such  forms  were  continued  under  the 
railroad  contracts. 

There  has  been  much  discussion  as  to  whether  the  Rail- 
roads should  be  required  to  continue  the  performance  of  this 
side  and  terminal  messenger  service.  The  service  required 
upon  one  route  may  differ  materially  from  that  required  upon 
another  in  proportion  to  the  amount  of  compensation  al- 
lowed for  the  entire  service  of  transportation.  Upon  some 
of  the  smaller  routes  the  proportion  of  expense  paid  out 
for  this  service  by  Railroads  to  employees  or  contractors 
has  been  so  large  that  the  Department  has  relieved  the 
roads  of  such  duty  and  assumed  the  performance  itself. 
In  the  Post  Office  Department  plan  hereinafter  referred  to 
there  is  a  suggestion  made  which  will  relieve  the  companies 
of  any  inequitable  financial  burden  in  connection  with  the 
performance  of  this  service  where  the  service  is  required  by 
the  Postmaster  General.  (Abstract  of  Evidence — Service 
Requirements,  etc.,  pp.  255-265,  supra.) 

SPACE  STATISTICS. 

In  the  preceding  pages  specific  reference  has  been  made 
under  the  several  headings  to  the  fact  that  under  the  space- 
basis  system  the  Railroads  constructed  and  operated  cars 
of  larger  size  than  were  required  by  the  Post  Office  De- 
partment for  the  needs  of  the  service;  and  that  when  the 
routes  were  stated  upon  the  space  basis  on  November  1, 
1916,  the  same  cai-s  that  the  Railroads  had  so  constructed 


635 

and  operated  under  the  weight-basis  system  were  neces- 
sarily used  by  them  in  the  performance  of  service  under 
the  new  system.  It  also  appears  in  evidence  that  there  was 
no  purpose  at  any  time,  upon  the  part  of  the  Railroads  or 
the  Department,  to  force  an  immediate  and  radical  change 
in  the  construction  or  size  of  the  cars  in  use  during  the  test 
period,  including  the  statistical  period  of  March  27  to 
April  30,  1917,  when  statistics  as  to  weights  and  space  and 
operation  of  space  and  statistics  as  to  revenues  and  ex- 
penses were  taken  for  the  purposes  of  this  incpiry.  It 
further  appears  from  the  evidence  that  under  the  weight- 
basis  system  the  Railroads  had  followed  the  custom  of 
operating  their  cars  beyond  the  points  of  authorized  dis- 
tances in  many  cases,  and  also  of  operating  cars  of  larger 
size  to  fill  authorizations  of  cars  of  lesser  lengths.  It 
appears  from  the  evidence  that  these  operations  by  the 
Raih'oads  under  the  weight-basis  system  were  voluntary 
on  their  part  and  were  made  without  any  purpose  of 
assessing  a  special  charge  against  the  mails  therefor,  the 
paj^ment  for  service  being  based  entirely  at  that  time  upon 
the  weights  of  mails  carried  with  additional  pay  for  certain 
railway  post-office  car  movements. 

It  is  further  established  by  the  evidence  that  after  the 
space  basis  was  inaugurated  and  during  the  test  period, 
the  Railroads  continued  the  operation  of  these  oversize 
cars,  and  continued  the  excessive  operation  of  cars  beyond 
authorized  distances,  as  above  described;  and  that  when 
they  made  their  reports  of  train  and  space  operation  during 
the  statistical  period  they  reported  the  operation  of  the 
space  authorized  by  the  Post  Office  Department  as  needed 
for  the  performance  of  the  service,  and  in  addition  thereto 
they  reported  and  claimed  in  connection  with  the  mails  all 
excess  space  in  cars  and  excess  operation  of  cars  above 
mentioned. 

These  facts  give  rise  to  the  main  contention  between  the 
Post  Office  Department  and  the  Railroads,  aside  from  the 
question  of  what  should  be  a  reasonable  rate  for  the  serv- 
ices performed.  The  purpose  of  the  statistical  inquiry 
was  to  secure  a  basis  for  apportioning  expenses  of  operation 
and  other  expenses  which  could  not  be  directly  allocated; 


636 

such  apportionment  to  be  upon  the  basis  of  the  ratio  of 
space  devoted  to  the  several  services  performed  in  passenger 
trains.  It  follows,  of  course,  that  if  the  Railroads  shall  be 
allowed  to  charge  against  the  mails  all  this  excess  space 
and  excess  and  unauthorized  operation,  the  proportion  of 
expenses  chargeable  to  the  mails  in  an  estimated  cost  ascer- 
tainment will  bo  much  larger  than  the  proportion  of  ex- 
penses chargeable  upon  the  basis  of  the  space  authorized 
by  the  Department  and  the  operation  of  space  in  accordance 
with  said  authorization. 

In  the  following  pages  under  tliis  subdivision  there  will 
be  made  a  detailed  statement  of  the  manner  in  and  the 
circumstances  under  which  the  Railroads  have  made  these 
excessive  charges  against  the  mails.  There  wiU  also  be 
shown  the  method  pursued  by  the  Post  Office  Department. 
It  is  confidently  believed  that  the  recitation  of  facts  will 
be  the  sufficient  condemnation  of  the  Railroads'  theory 
and  the  justification  of  the  Department's  method. 

Instructions  Concerning  Reports  of  Certain  Opera- 
tions OF  Space. 

For  the  purpose  of  securing  the  statistical  data  wdth 
respect  to  space  and  the  operation  of  space  in  passenger 
trains,  in  order  that  the  proper  ratio  of  space  operation 
for  each  class  of  service  performed  in  the  passenger  trains 
might  be  ascertained,  the  representatives  of  the  Post  Office 
Department  and  the  representatives  of  the  Railroads  col- 
laborated in  the  preparation  of  appropriate  forms  and 
instructions  designed  to  elicit  from  the  Railroads  all  the 
necessary  information  witli  respect  to  the  operation  of  their 
passenger  trains  during  the  statistical  period,  March  27 
to  April  30,  1917.  This  statistical  period  was  agreed  upon 
by  all  the  parties  concerned.  These  arrangements  were 
also  made  known  to  the  representative  of  the  Interstate 
Commerce  Commission  and  received  his  approval. 

Copies  of  the  forms  prepared  by  the  Department  and 
the  instructions  accompanying  said  forms  are  included 
in  Post  Office  Department  Exhibit  No.  27. 


637 

These  forms  provide  for  the  reporting  of  all  space 
operated  in  passenger  trains,  classified  according  to  the 
use  to  which  the  space  was  devoted;  that  is,  all  space 
used  for  passenger  purposes  was  so  reported  and  all 
space  for  baggage  was  so  reported,  and  it  was  the  purpose 
that  all  space  operated  for  express  pui'poses  should  be 
so  reported  and  all  space  operated  for  mails  should  be 
so  reported.  In  preparing  the  forms,  however,  the 
representatives  of  the  railroads  insisted  that  they  should 
be  prepared  in  such  a  manner  as  to  enable  the  notation 
thereon  of  excess,  unauthorized,  and  unused  space  claimed 
to  be  operated  by  the  Railroads  in  connection  with  the 
mail  service.  The  Post  Office  Department  representatives 
acquiesced  in  this  for  statistical  purposes  only,  agreeing 
that  the  reports  might  show  such  details,  but  only  for  the 
purposes  of  statistics,  and  denying  that  such  excess, 
unauthorized,  and  unused  space  claims  could  be  properly 
charged  against  the  mail  service.  At  the  same  time  the 
reservation  was  made  by  the  Railroads  to  present  such 
claim  in  this  hearing.  (Abstract  of  Evidence— Space  Sta- 
tistics— Instructions  Concerning  Reports,  etc.,  pp.  266-269, 
supra. ) 

Authorizations  of  Space  a  Better  Guide  to    Space 
Used  Than  Measurements  by  Railroad  Employees. 

In  the  preparation  of  the  instructions  the  Railroads 
desired  that,  with  respect  to  closed-pouch  and  storage 
mails  carried  in  baggage  cars  the  full  space  actually 
occupied  by  such  mails  should  be  measured  by  the  rail- 
road employees  and  so  reported  as  mail-space  operation. 

The  Department  could  not  agree  to  this  method,  be- 
cause in  principle  it  was  believed  to  be  wrong  as  disregard- 
ing the  authorized  space  in  which  the  mails  could  actually 
be  carried  if  the  railroads  so  desired  it;  and, further, because 
it  was  unwise  and  unsafe  to  depend  upon  the  opinions  of 
railroad  employees  in  the  cars  and  upon  reports  of  floor 
space  covered  by  mails  without  regard  to  the  space  in 
which  they  could  economically  be  piled  and  carried. 
Furthermore,  the  mail  authorizations  fully  measured  the 


638 

space  that  should  be  occupied  by  the  mails,  and  this 
conclusion  has  proven  to  be  correct;  for  the  statistics 
taken  upon  representative  lines  throughout  the  country, 
hereinbefore  referred  to,  show  that  the  number  of  sacks 
determined  upon  and  used  by  the  Department  as  the 
measure  of  space  for  such  mails  was  very  liberal  to  the 
Railroads. 

However,  if  this  contention  of  the  Railroads  had  been 
acceded  to  it  would  not  have  removed  the  further  cause 
for  controversy  as  to  the  unauthorized  and  unused  oper- 
ation over  mileage  where  the  mails  were  not  carried,  and 
as  to  return  movements.  (Abstract  of  Evidence — Space 
Statistics — Authorizations  of  Space  a  Better  Guide,  etc., 
pp.  269-272,  suyra.) 

Excessive   Claims   IVIade   by  the   Railroads   Charged 
TO  THE  Mails  in  Their  Reports  of  Space  Operated. 

The  claims  for  excess,  unauthorized,  and  unused  space 
reported  by  the  railroads  in  connection  with  the  mail 
service  amounted  to  31.2  per  cent  of  the  total  author- 
ized space  for  mails.  The  Department  has  classified 
and  described  the  character  of  the  several  kinds  of  this 
excess,  unauthorized,  and  unused  space  so  reported,  in  Post 
Office  Department  Exhibit  47  (pp.  78-81,  supra),  and  has 
also  tabulated  the  car-foot  miles  under  each  of  said  classi- 
fications and  set  them  forth  in  Post  Office  Department 
Exhibit  No.  48  (p.  82,  sv/pra).  The  total  tabulated  car- 
foot  miles  so  reported  and  charged  by  the  railroads  against 
the  mails  was  324,069,610  for  the  statistical  period.  The 
car-foot  miles  making  up  this  total  representing  the  several 
classifications  referred  to  and  the  per  cents  of  the  same  to 
the  total  are  set  forth  in  the  Digest  of  Exhibits,  p.  82,  supra. 

The  character  of  the  charges  represented  in  this  total  of 
car-foot  miles  is  set  forth  and  explained  in  the  testimony 
of  the  several  witnesses  for  the  Railroads  and  for  the 
Department,  reference  to  which  will  be  made  below. 


639 

60-FOOT    RAILWAY   POST-OFFICE    CAR    SERVICE. 

The  Railroads  charged  to  the  mails  excess  space  and 
operation  in  connection  with  60-foot  railway  post-office 
cars  under  the  following  conditions: 

(a)  The  Railroads  made  the  charge  in  all  cases  where  the 
Railroads  operated  full  railway  post-office  cars  of  greater 
length  than  the  authorized  length.  (Post  Ofhce  Depart- 
ment Exhibit  47,  first  paragraph.) 

In  this  class  of  cases  were  operations  of  70-foot  cars 
in  lieu  of  60-foot  authorizations,  as  provided  for  by  the 
statute. 

The  only  justification  offered  for  this  by  the  Railroads 
is  found  in  'Mr.  Wettling's  testimony,  in  which  he  said 
that  it  was  on  the  theory  that  the  car  had  been  originally 
built  pursuant  to  some  agreement  or  understanding  with 
the  Department.      (Abstract  of  Evidence,  p.  280,  suyra.) 

The  law  specifies  60  feet  as  the  standard  size  of  full 
railway  post-office  cars  and  the  Department  authorizes 
that  size  of  cars.  In  many  cases  the  companies  operate 
cars  of  greater  length,  ranging  from  1  to  10  feet  over- 
size, the  latter  being  what  are  known  as  the  70-foot  cars. 

(b)  The  Railroads  charged  to  the  mails  all  excess  un- 
authorized operation  of  full  railway  post-office  cars  beyond 
the  authorized  rim  of  such  unit.  (Post  Office  Department 
Exhibit  47,  "A.") 

These  were  principally  cases  such  as  where  a  full  railway 
post-office  car  was  authorized  between  two  points,  but  the 
full  car  was  rim  by  the  railroad  beyond  the  authorized  dis- 
tance. These  also  occur  where  a  change  in  the  authoriza- 
tion of  the  unit  from  a  60-foot  full  car  to  a  30-foot  apart- 
ment railway  post-office  car  was  made  at  a  divisional  pomt 
and  the  railroad  company  operated  a  full  car  tlirough  to  the 
end  of  the  train  run.  Such  an  instance  is  cited  in  the 
Abstract  of  Evidence  on  pages  275-278,  supra. 

The  contention  of  the  Jiailroads  is  that  such  changes  in 
those  instances  could  not  bo  made  for  operating  reasons; 
but  the  weight  of  evidence  is  to  the  effect  that  these 
changes  are  ordered  to  be  maile  only  at  divisional  points 


640 

as  doibuMl  hi  tho  Postal  Laws  and  .Kogulntions,  and  where 
conditions  exist  such  as  are  descril)ed  in  snch  reguhitions. 
There  is  no  valid  reason  why  the  Railroads  shoidd  not 
make  the  changes  and  if  they  do  not  provide  for  such 
changes  tho  operation  of  the  full  cars  to  the  ends  of  the 
train  runs  should  be  charged  to  the  passenger  service  and 
not  to  the  mails,  which  are  not  responsible  therefor. 

(c)  Tlic  Railroads  charged  to  the  mails  all  excess  un- 
authorized operation  of  full  railway  post-ofhce  cars  on  days 
when  not  authorized  and  when  no  service  was  performed  in 
the  carriage  of  the  mails.  Post  Office  Department  Exhibit 
47.  "B.") 

These  are  cases  such  as  where  a  full  railway  post-office 
car  was  authorized  six  or  less  times  a  week  but  the  railroad 
operated  the  car  on  other  days  of  the  week. 

There  appears  to  be  no  reasonable  excuse  offered  by  the 
Railroads  for  this  operation  or  the  charging  of  the  same  to 
the  mails. 

(d)  The  Railroads  charged  to  the  mails  all  excess  un- 
authorized operation  of  excess  space  in  full  railway  post- 
office  cars  run  m  fulfillment  of  authorizatiojis  of  .SO-foot 
apartments  or  15-foot  apartments  in  cars.     {Id.,  "K.") 

Space  authorized  and  claimed  by  the  Railroads  under 
this  classification  consists  of  cases  where  a  15-foot  or  a  30- 
foot  apartment  in  a  combination  car  was  authorized  and 
the  railroad  for  its  own  convenience  furnished  and  operated 
m  fulfilhnent  of  such  authorization  a  full  railway  post- 
office  car,  the  difference  between  tlie  apartment  space 
authorization  and  the  length  of  the  car  furnished  being 
charged  to  the  mails. 

There  appears  to  be  no  reasonable  excuse  offered  l)y  the 
Railroads  for  this  excessive  operation  or  for  a  charge  of 
the  same  to  the  mails. 

These  charges  against  the  mails  for  excess  operation  of 
full  railway  post-office  cars  are  not  only  evidenced  by  the 
exhibits  referred  to,  but  by  the  lestimojiy  of  witnesses  for 
the  Railroads  and  for  the  Department.  (Abstract  of  Ev- 
idence— Excessive  Claims,  etc.,  pp.  273-284,  supra.) 


641 

APARTArENT-CAR    SERVICE. 

The  Railroads  charged  to  the  mails  excess  space  and  oper- 
ation in  connection  with  apartment-car  service  mider  the 
following  conditions  (Abstract  of  Evidence,  pp.  284-289, 
supra) : 

(a)  The  .Railroads  charged  to  the  mails  all  excess  space 
over  authorized'space  in  railway  post-office  apartments  in 
combination  cars  (including  those  cases  above  mentioned, 
where  full  cars  were  substituted  for  apartment  cars  and  not 
considered  here). 

These  cover  such  cases  as  where  an  apartment  20,  25, 
or  30  feet  in  length  was  operated  by  the  Railroads  to  fulfill 
a  15-foot  authorization. 

Such  an  instance  is  mentioned  in  the  testimon}^  for  the 
Department  m  Abstract  of  Evidence,  pages  288,  289,  supra. 

The  only  excuse  that  can  be  offered  by  the  .Railroads  for 
this  operation  of  excessive  space  may  be  found  in  the  fact 
that  the  cars  m  their  possession  were  constructed  of  differ- 
ent sizes  and  didfnot  conform  strictly  to  the  authorized 
units  named  in  the  statute.  These  cars,  however,  were 
the  same  cars  as  had  been  in  use  under  the  weight-basis 
system,  and,  as  hereinbefore  stated,  it  was  not  the  inten- 
tion of  either  the  Railroads  or  the  Department  to  change 
their  sizes  during  the  test  period.  The  fact,  however,  that 
the  roads  had  these  cars  of  excess  sizes  and  were  compelled 
to  operate  them  under  such  conditions  does  not  in  any 
respect  justify  them  ui  charging  the  excess  space  and  oper- 
ation to  the  mails. 

(h)  The  Railroads  charged  to  the  mails  all  <ixcess  unau- 
thorized operation  of  Railway  Post  Office  apartments  in 
combination  cars  authorized  between  two  points  and 
operated  by  the  railroad  company  beyond  such  authorized 
distance.     (Post  Oflice  Department  Exhibit  47,  "A.") 

Such  operations  over  unauthorized  mileage  covered 
cases,  among  others,  where  the  car  was  operated  over 
mileage  over  which  the  mail  service  was  not  authorized  in 
the  particular  train  in  which  the  car  was  operated;  over 
mileage  over  which  no  mails  were  authorized  on  any 
train,  notwithstanding  which  the  car  in  question  was  run 

122698—19 41 


042 

without  authority  and  without  carrying  the  mails;  and 
movements  to  and  from  yards  and  shops.  Examples 
of  this  are  found  in  the  Abstract  of  Evidence,  pages  285-288, 
supra. 

There  appears  to  be  no  reasonable  excuse  offered  by 
the  Railroads  for  this  excess  operation  or  for  its  charge  to 
the  mails. 

(c)  The  Railroads  charged  to  the  mails  all  excess  unau- 
thorized operation  of  excess  space  in  railway  post-oflice 
apartment  cars  over  that  authorized,  and  run  by  the  rail- 
road beyond  the  authorized  distance.  (Post  Office  De- 
partment Exhibit  No.  47,  ''AE.") 

These  were  cases  where  the  railroad  company  ran  an 
apartment  of  larger  size  than  that  required  to  fill  the 
authorization  and  w^liere  such  a  larger  apartment  w^as  run 
by  the  railroad  over  a  distance  unauthorized  for  mail 
service. 

There  appears  to  be  no  excuse  offered  by  the  Railroads 
for  this  excess  operation,  except  that  their  cars  were  of 
larger  size  than  the  cars  authorized.  Comments  upon 
this  have  been  made  above  in  connection  with  cases 
where  larger  size  apartments  than  those  authorized  were 
furnished. 

(d)  The  Railroads  charged  to  the  mails  all  railway  post- 
office  apartments  in  combination  cars  authorized  less  than 
the  full  number  of  days  in  a  week  but  operated  by  the 
railroad  company  on  other  davs  not  authorized.  (Id., 
"B.") 

This  classification  covers  cases  such  as  w^here  an  apai't- 
ment  in  a  combination  car  is  authorized  for  six  days  in  the 
week  but  the  car  in  which  the  apartment  is  contained  is 
operated  by  the  railroad  on  Sundays  or  other  days  when 
there  are  no  mails  carried. 

The  only  possible  excuse  the  Railroads  could  have  for 
this  excess  operation  would  be  in  cases  where  their  equip- 
ment was  necessarily  limited  and  no  other  car  was  avail- 
able for  operation  on  the  days  upon  which  mails  were  not 
authorized  to  be  carried.  There  is  little  justification  in 
any  case  for  charging  this  excess  operation  against  the 
mails,  because  the  car  when  operated  on  such  nonmail 


G43 

days  must  necessarily  be  operated  for  passenger  purposes, 
even  if  no  mails  were  authorized  on  the  line.  Considering 
the  matter  from  the  point  of  view  of  service  rendered  and 
the  benefit  derived  to  the  mails,  there  is  no  justification 
whatever  in  this  charge. 

(e)  The  Railroads  charged  to  the  mails  all  e^ccess  unau- 
thorized space  in  apartments  in  combination  cars,  resulting 
from  the  operation  of  a  larger  sized  apartment  than  the 
15-foot  apartment  authorized,  and  where  such  larger  apart- 
ment was  run  by  the  Railroad  on  a  day  or  days  unauthorized 
for  mail  service.     (Id.,  "BE.")* 

This  classification  would  include  such  a  case  as  where  a 
15-foot  apartment  car  is  authorized  for  six  days  in  the 
week,  but  not  on  Sundays,  and  in  fulfillment  of  the  authori- 
zation the  Railroad  furnished  a  25-foot  apartment  and 
operated  the  same  car  on  Sundays,  when  the  apartment 
service  was  not  authorized  and  no  mails  were  carried.  The 
Railroads  not  only  charged  the  excess  movement  of  the 
15-foot  apartment  on  Sunday  to  the  mails  but  also  the 
excess  movement  for  the  10-foot  excess  space  over  the 
15-foot  apartment. 

There  can  be  no  further  excuse  offered  by  the  Railroads 
than  that  mentioned  above  in  regard  to  classification  ''B" 
movements,  and  comments  upon  the  matter  there  are 
equally  applicable  here.  There  appears  to  be  no  justifi- 
cation whatever  for  this  charge  against  the  mails. 

(/)  The  Railroads  charged  to  the  mails  all  excess  unau- 
thorized operation  of  railway  post-office  apartments  in 
combination  cars  authorized  in  one  train  daily  each  way 
but  operated  by  the  railroads  on  other  trains  on  which 
no  mails  were  authorized  to  be  carried;  also  all  excess 
unauthorized  operation  where  railway  post-office  apart- 
ment in  a  combination  car  was  authorized  between  two 
points,  but  the  car  containing  the  apartment  was  run  by 
the  Railroad  in  other  trains  than  those  in  which  the  mails 
were  authorized  to  be  carried  and  beyond  the  points 
authorized  and  over  trackage  covered  by  another  mail 
route  or  over  trackage  over  which  no  mails  were  authorized 
to  be  can-ied.     (/(/.,  "C") 


044 

No  reas()na])l(>  excuse  is  given  l)y  the  Railjoiuls  I'or  the 
charging  of  this  excess  operation  against  tlie  mails.  If 
for  lack  of  equipment  or  for  any  other  reason  unconnected 
with  the  mail  service  (and  there  is  no  connection  whatever 
shown  by  the  testimon}-)  the  Railroads  iind  it  convenient 
to  operate  their  cars  in  this  manner,  such  operation  is 
clearly  for  the  purposes  of  the  passenger  service  alone  and 
in  no  wise  is  necessary  for  the  transportation  of  mails. 
The  charge  to  the  mails  is  therefore  wholly  unjustified. 

(g)  The  Railroads  charged  to  the  mails  all  unauthorized 
excess  operation  where  railway  post-office  apartment  in 
combination  car  was  authorized  in  certain  trains  and  the 
Railroad  furnished  an  apartment  of  larger  size  than  re- 
quired to  fulfill  the  authorization  and  operated  it  on 
other  trains  upon  which  no  mails  were  authorized  to  be 
carried,  claiming  the  excess  space  and  mileage  for  the 
unauthorized  trains.     {Id.,  "CE.") 

There  has  been  no  satisfactory  excuse  offered  by  the 
Railroads  for  charging  this  excess  operation  to  the  mails. 
All  that  has  been  said  heretofore  with  reference  to  the  ab- 
sence of  justification  for  similar  charges  is  clearl}'  a])plica- 
ble  here. 

(Ii)  The  Railroads  charged  to  the  mails  all  excess  un- 
authorized operation  of  apartment  car  under  the  followmg 
conditions,  namely: 

Where  apartment  railway  post-office  car  service  was  dis- 
continued on  a  route  and  superseded  by  storage  space  or 
closed-pouch  space  in  lieu  thereof,  and  the  Railroad  con- 
tinued to  furnish  the  apartment  car  without  authorization 
and  reported  the  excess  mileage  for  the  full  space  m  such 
car  against  the  mails.     (Id.,  "D.") 

The  Railroads  offer  no  reasonable  excuse  for  this  charge 
of  excessive  operation  against  the  mails.  If  such  ojoeration 
can  be  charged  against  the  mails,  the  authority  and  privi- 
lege to  change  authorizations  is  wholly  futile.  These 
apartment  cars  were  no  longer  needed  for  mail  purposes 
and  the  service  was  discontinued.  It  is  for  the  Post- 
master General  to  say  whether  the  mails  shall  be  distributed 
en  route  on  any  particular  road  or  whether  they  shall  be 
carried    in   closed   pouches  without  such   distribution.     If 


045 

he  can  not  discontinue  a  railway  post  office  and  supersede 
it  with  closed-pouch  service,  the  purpose  of  the  law  is 
entirely  nullified  and  the  privilege  of  administerhig  the 
service  in  this  manner  is  wholly  without  aiiy  benefit  so 
far  as  the  cost  of  the  service  is  concerned.  If  the  theory 
of  the  Railroads  be  correct  in  this  respect,  they  need  not 
change  any  of  their  cars  at  any  time  to  conform  to  author- 
ized units,  but  may  continue  to  operate  any  cars  they  may 
chance  to  have  without  change  and  charge  the  entu-e  cost 
of  the  same  to  the  Department,  while  the  Department  at 
the  same  time  is  attempting  to  conduct  the  service  withm 
the  spirit  of  the  statute  which  authorizes  different  units 
of  cars.  The  Railroads'  charge  to  the  mails  in  this  case  is 
Avholly  without  justification. 

STORAGE-CAR    SERA^CE. 

The  Railroads  charged  to  the  mails  excess  space  and 
operation  in  connection  with  storage-car  service,  under  the 
following  conditions: 

(a)  The  Railroads  charged  to  the  mails  all  excess  space  in 
and  operation  of  such  excess  space  in  storage  cars  in  excess 
of  the  60-foot  authorized  length.     {Id.,  second  paragraph.) 

This  classification  includes  all  cases  of  excess  in  length  of 
storage  cars  above  60  feet  and  where  such  cars  were  fur- 
nished and  operated  in  fulfillment  of  storage-car  authoriza- 
tions of  60  feet  as  provided  for  by  the  law.  Some  Railroads 
have  storage  cars  of  lengths  varying  from  60  to  70  feet. 
The  oi)eration  of  the  excess  space  was  charged  to  the  mails. 

An  example  of  such  operation  and  claim  is  referred  to  in 
the  testimony  of  Mr.  McBride  for  the  Do])artment.  (Ab- 
stract of  Evidence,  p.  296,  fin  pro.) 

The  only  excuse  which  could  be  offered  by  tiie  Railroads 
for  this  excess  operation  and  for  its  charge  against  the  mails 
is  the  same  as  that  referred  to  in  the  case  of  the  operation 
of  oversize  full  railway  post-office  cars.  The  same  com- 
ments with  reference  to  such  theory  are  applicable  here. 

(&)  The  Railroads  charged  to  the  mails  all  excess  un- 
authorized operation  of  full  mail-storage  cars  authorized  be- 
tween two  points  and  operated  by  the  Raih'oads  over  dis- 
tance beyond  the  authorized  run.  Such  exam])les  of  oper- 
ation are  discussed  on  cross-examination  by  Witness 
Wettling  for  the  Railroads.      (Id.,  pp.  289-291,  supra.) 


640 

The  oul}'  excuse  given  by  the  Kaih-oads  for  chargmg 
this  excess  space  and  movement  to  the  mails  is  there  stated 
to  be  similar  to  the  reason  for  charging  the  movement  of 
full  railway  post-office  cars  for  the  entire  distance  of  the 
car  run,  although  the  authorization  is  changed  at  a  divi- 
sional point.  These  charges  for  excessive  operations  under 
these  conditions  arise  where  the  change  in  the  storage-car 
unit  is  authorized  at  a  divisional  point,  and  instead  of 
making  the  change  the  company  runs  the  car  through  to  a 
point  beyond. 

The  Department  believes  that  these  changes  can  be  made 
at  divisional  points  and  that  if  they  are  not  made  and  the 
Railroads  operate  the  cars  beyond  for  their  own  convenience 
or  for  reasons  in  which  the  mails  are  not  concerned,  the 
excess  operation  should  not  be  charged  to  the  mails. 

(c)  The  Railroads  charged  to  the  mails  all  unauthorized 
excess  operation  of  full  mail-storage  cars  where  such  cars 
were  authorized  six  or  less  times  a  week,  but  the  railroad 
operated  the  full  car  on  other  days  of  the  week,  chargmg 
the  excess  operation  to  the  mails.  (Post  Office  Depart- 
ment Exhibit  47,  "B.") 

Such  operation  is  discussed  in  the  testimony  of  Witness 
Wettling  for  the  Railroads  on  cross-examination.  (Ab- 
stract of  Evidence — 60-foot  Storage  Car  Service,  p.  291, 
supra.) 

This  classification  includes  cases  where  the  full  mail- 
storage  car  was  o})erated  on  days  on  which  no  mails  were 
authorized  to  be  carried  in  the  same. 

As  the  full-storage  car  is  devoted  entirely  to  one  service, 
the  Railroads  have  not  even  the  excuse  ofi^ered  in  the  case  of 
the  operation  of  combination  cars  on  days  upon  which  the 
mails  are  not  carried.  The  only  conceivable  excuse  for 
operating  a  full-storage  car  would  be  that  it  was  necessary 
to  return  the  car  to  the  initial  pohit  for  use  on  the  day  of 
authorization;  but  even  in  such  cases  such  a  result  would 
arise  from  a  lack  of  adequate  equipment  and  the  excess 
space  and  operation  should  not  be  charged  to  the  mails  in 
ascertaining  cost.  A  proper  return  on  the  adequate  equip- 
ment might  be  considered. 

Reference  is  had  to  the  testimony  of  the  witnesses  upon 
this  subject.     (7\.])stract  of  Evidence,  pp.  289-296,  supra.) 


6-47 

STORAGE-SPACE    AND    CLOSED-POUCH    SERVICE. 

The  Railroads  charged  to  the  mails  all  excess  and  un- 
authorized space  and  operation  in  connection  with  storage- 
space  and  closed-pouch  service  under  the  following  con- 
ditions:    (Abstract  of  Evidence,  pp.  296-302,  supra.) 

(a)  The  Railroads  charged  to  the  mails  all  6xcess  unau- 
thorized space  and  operation  of  mail-storage  space  and 
closed-pouch  space  in  combinationcars  where  authorization 
was  between  two  points  only  and  the  Railroad  operated  the 
combination  car  beyond  the  authorized  distance,  charging 
the  operation  of  the  space  for  the  unauthorized  distance  to 
the  mails.     (Post  Office  Department  Exhibit  47,  "A.") 

This  classification  covers  cases  such  as  where  the  car  hi 
which  the  storage  space  or  closed-pouch  space  is  authorized 
between  the  two  pomts  is  operated  over  mileage  over 
which  the  mail  service  is  not  authorized  in  the  particular 
train;  over  mileage  over  which  no  mails  are  authorized  on 
any  train  (nonmail  mileage) ;  and  movements  to  and  from 
yards  and  shops.  Some  examples  of  these  movements  and 
excess  charges  to  the  mails  are  discussed  in  the  testimony 
of  Witness  Wettling  for  the  Railroads  on  cross-examination. 

No  adequate  excuse  is  offered  by  the  Railroads  for 
making  this  excessive  charge  against  the  mails  for  this 
operation.  These  units  of  space  are  authorized  in  mixed 
cars  regularly  carried  in  the  consist  of  the  trams,  and  they 
only  utilize  space  available  therein  which  in  most  if  not  in 
all  the  cases  would  not  be  used  by  any  service  if  not  occu- 
pied by  the  mails.  In  other  words,  the  mails  are  carried 
incidentally  and  do  not  furnish  any  motive  for  operating 
the  mixed  car.  The  space  vacated  by  the  mails  may  be 
utilized  by  the  Railroads  for  their  own  services  over  the 
unauthorized  mileage  and  undoubtedly  hi  many  cases  is  so 
utilized.  If  the  Railroads'  charge  to  the  mails  of  the  maxi- 
mum authorization  for  storage  space  in  a  car  over  the 
entire  run  of  the  car  be  correct,  it  must  be  based  upon  a 
theory  that  it  is  necessary  for  the  railroad  to  operate  the 
car  over  its  entire  run  to  accommodate  the  maximum 
authorization  at  any  point,  and  that  upon  the  discon- 
tinuance or  reduction  of  a  storage  authorization  the  s])ace 


C48 

so  rclcNiscd  is  not  availal)lc  for  uso  of  (he  railroad,  and  in 
fact  is  not  so  used.  Such  assumj)tioiis  arc  wholly  against 
reason  and  the  facts  in  the  case.  The  Kaih-oads  liave  ad- 
vanced the  tlieory  that  they  must  reserve  the  maximum 
s])ace  in  the  car  for  the  use  t)f  the  l)(^partment.  This  claim 
is  pal])ably  absurd  and  will  be  referred  to  hereinafter. 

Reference  is  had  to  the  testimony  of  witnesses  upon  the 
subject  of  this  sulxlivision.  (A])stract  of  Evidence,  pp. 
296-302,  sujyra.) 

(b)  The  liailroads  charged  to  the  mails  all  excess  and  un- 
authorized o])eration  where  mail-storage  space  or  closed- 
pouch  space  in  combination  car  was  authorized  six  or  less 
times  a  week,  but  the  car  containing  the  space  equivalent 
to  the  unit  of  authorization  w^as  run  by  the  railroad  on  other 
days  of  the  week.  There  was  an  excess  charge  made  to  the 
mails  of  space  equal  to  that  of  the  authorized  miit  so  run, 
although  not  authorized  on  such  days.  (Post  Office 
Department  Exhibit  47,  "B.") 

This  classification  includes  cases  such  as  where  a  3-foot, 
7-foot,  or  15-foot  storage-space  unit  was  authorized  in  a 
baggage  car  for  six  days  in  the  week  and  the  same  car  was 
run  by  the  railroad  in  its  regular  consist  on  Sunday,  and 
although  no  mails  were  authorized  to  be  carried  in  the  car 
on  Sunday,  an  excess  charge  w^as  made  to  the  mails  for  the 
same  amount  of  space  authorized  on  week  days. 

Specific  instances  are  cited  by  Witness  McBride  for  the 
Department  where  such  authorizations  were  made  for  only 
a  few  days  in  the  week  and  the  excessive  charge  was  made 
to  the  mails  of  the  same  space  on  other  days.  (Abstract 
of  Evidence — Storage-space  Service,  p.  298,  supra.) 

Ml-.  McBride's  testimony  shows  that  during  the  statis- 
tical period  of  35  days,  30  feet  of  storage  space  was  author- 
ized 10  trips  m  train  1,  Kansas  City  and  Tucumcari  .Railway 
Post  Office  on  the  Rock  Island.  Tliis  produced  a  legiti- 
mate charge  against  the  mails  of  185,400  car-foot  miles 
over  a  run  of  618  miles,  but  the  railroad  claimed  the  opera- 
tion of  the  same  amount  of  space  for  the  remaining  25 
trips  over  the  same  mileage,  resulting  in  an  excessive  charge 
agauist  the  mails  of  463,500  car-foot  miles.  This  was  for  the 
operation  in  one  direction.     The  railroad  also  claimed  for 


G40 

the  return  movement  in  the  return  tram  over  the  entire 
distance  for  the  full  period  of  35  days,  648,900  car-foot 
miles,  or  a  total  excessive  claim  of  1,112,400  car-foot  miles. 

In  another  case  his  testimony  shows  that  durmg  th« 
statistical  period  there  was  a  15-foot  storage  space  author- 
ized 80  trips,  but  the  Railroads  claimed  the  same  space 
movement  for  the  15  feet  on  the  5  other  trips,  although 
these  trips  were  not  authorized  to  carry  mails,  and  carried 
non(\ 

There  can  be  no  justification  for  such  charges  against 
the  mail  service. 

{(')  The  Railroads  charged  agauist  the  mails  all  excess  and 
unauthorized  operation  of  mail-storage  space  and  closed- 
pouch  space  where  a  unit  of  mail-storage  space  or  closed- 
pouch  space  in  a  combmation  car  was  authorized  daily  ui 
one  train  each  way,  but  the  same  car  was  run  by  the  rail- 
road between  the  same  points  in  other  trams  daily.  (Post 
OfRce  Department  Exhibit  47,  "C.) 

Tliere  can  be  no  adequate  excuse  for  this  excessive 
charge.  There  is  not  even  the  excuse  here  that  the  Rail- 
roads might  urge  if  the  operation  were  one  of  an  apartment 
in  a  combmation  car.  Apparently  the  charge  rests  upon 
the  theory  that  the  Department  having  requested  space 
m  the  baggage  car  on  one  day  m  one  train  it  becomes 
obliged  to  pay  for  the  same  space  when  the  car  is  run  on 
other  trips  or  in  other  trains  on  the  same  day,  although 
not  authorized  or  used  for  the  mails,  and  although  it  may 
possibly  be  used  by  the  railroad.  It  is  an  example  of  the 
extent  to  which  the  Railroads  went  in  overloading  the  mail- 
space  ratio. 

(d)  The  Railroads  charged  to  the  mails  all  excess  and  unau- 
thorized storage  space  or  closed-pouch  space  where  a  unit 
of  storage  space  or  closed-pouch  space  was  authorized  on 
a  given  train  for  part  of  the  days  of  the  week  and  a  lesser 
unit  of  storage  space  or  closed-pouch  space  was  authorized 
on  the  remaining  days  of  the  week.  Tlie  .Railroads  made 
the  excessive  claim  against  the  mails  for  the  opei-ation  of 
the  difference  in  the  sizes  of  units  on  the  days  when  the 
lesser  unit  was  authorized.      (Id.,  "E"'.) 


650 

No  jiistification  has  been  criven  by  the  .Uaih-oaJs  for  this 
excessive  claim.  Not  even  the  absurd  claim  that  the  rail- 
road must  provide  for  the  maximum  authorization  and 
hold  the  space  available  for  the  Department  under  all 
circumstances  could  be  urged  here.  The  Kailroads  loiow 
in  advance  the  authorization  required  for  each  day,  which 
is  confined  to  the  limits  of  the  consist  of  the  train,  and  can 
utilize  the  space  not  required  for  the  mails  for  its  own 
purposes.  They  do  not  have  to  provide  the  full  7  feet  on 
the  days  on  which  3  feet  only  are  authorized,  and  no  change 
in  consist  is  recpired  or  needed  to  handle  the  service  in  the 
mixed  cars.  Furthermore,  m  all  such  cases  the  Railroads 
were  not  contented  to  make  the  excessive  charge  m  one 
direction  only,  but  charged  the  same  in  all  cases  for  the 
return  direction  also.  It  is  another  example  of  the  method 
pm-sued  by  the  Railroads  m  making  excess  charges  to  the 
mails.  In  this  classification  alone  the  car-foot  miles  so 
charged  aggregate  1,129,061. 

(e)  The  Railroads  charged  to  the  mails  all  excess  and 
unauthorized  mail-storage  space  or  closed-pouch  space 
where  emergency  service  by  units  of  mail-storage  space 
or  closed-pouch  space  m  combmation  cars  was  authorized 
one  way  between  given  points.  The'  Railroads  charged 
to  the  mails  the  operation  of  the  same  space  beyond  the 
pomt  of  authorization  and  for  the  balance  of  the  tram  run, 
and  also  made  the  excessive  claim  against  the  mails  for 
the  distance  of  the  return  movement  as  well.  (Id.,  "H".) 

If  any  possible  excuse  or  justification  could  be  offered 
by  the  Railroads  for  such  a  charge  where  the  authorization 
is  a  permanent  one,  it  could  not  possibly  hold  in  this  kind 
of  a  case.  Emergency  service  is  authorized  under  these 
circmnstances  only  where  the  space  to  be  used  is  run  by 
the  railroad  whether  the  mails  are  or  are  not  authorized 
to  be  carried  therein,  and  is  therefore  always  found  in  the 
consist  of  the  train.  The  railroad  was  not  obliged  to  supply 
additional  space  or  change  the  consist  of  its  regularly 
operated  train  for  this  purpose.  The  testimony  shows 
that,  without  any  exception  which  has  been  specifically 
pointed  out,  the  utilization  of  space  in  the  cars  for  this 
emergency  service  furnishes  them  a  revenue  for  the  space 


651 

used  which  otherwise  would  yield  them  nothing.  To 
charge  the'  space  in  this  excessive  manner  to  the  mails 
is  distinctly  unfair  and  is  another  example  of  the  extent  to 
which  the  Railroads  went  to  increase  the  mail-space  ratio. 
(/)  The  Railroads  charged  to  the  mails  all  excess  and 
unauthorized  operation  of  space  where  a  unit  of  mail- 
storage  space  in  a  baggage  car  was  authorized  and  the  rail- 
road for  its  own  convenience  furnished  and  operated  in 
fulfillment  of  such  storage  space  in  a  baggage  car  a  full- 
storage  car  or  baggage  car.  They  charged  to  the  mails  the 
difference  between  the  mail-storage  space  authorization 
and  the  full  length  of  the  car  furnished.     {Id.,  "K. ") 

Tlie  space  reported  and  charged  against  the  mails  under 
this  classification,  is  the  largest  in  amount  of  any  class,  and 
is  shown  on  Post  Office  Department  Exhibit  No.  48.  If  any, 
of  it  could  be  justified  by  the  Railroads  it  must  be  upon  the 
theory  that  the  entire  space  in  the  consist  of  the  train  was 
occupied  or  contracted  for  by  other  classes  of  service,  and 
that  in  order  to  fill  the  requisition  for  the  mail  service  an 
entire  additional  car  must  be  placed  in  the  consist  of  the 
train.  If  such  cases  exist  it  was  incumbent  upon  the  Rail- 
roads to  point  them  out  and  distinguish  them  from  the 
large  body  of  cases  in  which  they  have,  without  exception, 
made  these  charges  against  the  mails.  The  burden  was 
upon  them  to  justify  their  charge. 

Even  where  such  theories  were  advanced  the  probabili- 
ti&s  are  that  a  rearrangement  of  the  consist  of  the  train, 
so  that  one  mixed  car  would  have  taken  care  of  all  services 
was  possible.  It  should  not  be  forgotten  that  the  large  sys- 
tems on  whose  reports  most  of  this  class  of  space  is  claimed 
own  many  mixed  cars  of  varying  lengths;  and  in  many 
cases  which  have  been  examined  the  substitution  of  a  car 
of  the  size  which  the  company  had  and  did  operate  on  other 
trains  might  have  obviated  the  necessity  of  operating  an 
additional  car.  Furthermore,  the  mail  service  is  constant. 
The  space  required  by  the  Department  is  known  in  advance 
and  is  the  same  every  day;  so  that  the  company  knows 
what  must  be  furnished.  This,  according  to  the  testimony 
of  the  Railroads'  witnesses,  is  the  exact  opposite  of  the 
condition  in  the  baggage  and  express  services.    They  have 


g:)2 

testified  that  no  specific  space  is  necessary ,  to  care  for 
these  services  and  that  space  for  the  mails  must  be  reserved. 
A'VTiy,  therefore,  should  the  mail  service  be  penalized,  if 
it  becomes  necessary  to  place  another  car  in  the  train, 
because  the  company  chooses  to  run  too  small  a  car  to 
handle  the  mail,  together  with  the  express  and  baggage? 
It  would  seem  that  the  other  services  should  be  held 
responsible  as  well.  Certainly  the  mails  should  not  be 
penalized  under  such  circumstances;  but  rather  they 
should  be  given  first  consideration;  for  the  Railroads  have 
testified  that  they  have  a  contract  to  care  for  the  mails 
and  have  no  contract  to  care  for  the  baggage  and  express 
in  the  same  manner. 

(g)  The  Railroads  charged  to  the  mails  all  excess  and 
imauthorized  storage  space  or  closed-pouch  space  where 
a  unit  of  storage  space  or  closed-pouch  space  was  author- 
ized between  A  and  B  and  a  lesser  unit  was  authorized  for 
a  further  distance  between  B  and  C.  In  this  case  the  rail- 
road charged  to  the  mails  the  mileage  and  operation  for 
the  difference  between  the  greater  and  the  lesser  unit  for 
the  distance  from  B  to  C.    {Id.,  "M".) 

What  has  been  said  with  reference  to  the  excessive 
claims  for  storage  space  under  the  classifications  "A," 
"H,"  and  "R,"  applies  as  well  to  the  classification  here. 
These  authorizations  are  changed  only  at  divisional  points. 
The  Railroads  know  in  advance  that  the  additional  space 
will  be  available  at  the  divisional  points  for  any  purpbse 
to  which  it  may  be  devoted.  If  the  original  authorization 
has  not  disturbed  the  regular  consist  of  the  train  or  the 
regular  traffic  in  the  car,  there  appears  to  be  no  reason 
why  the  space  equivalent  to  the  space  discontinued  at  the 
divisional  point  should  be  charged  directly  to  the  mails. 

(h)  The  Railroads  charged  to  the  mails  all  excess  and  un- 
authorized storage  space  or  closed-pouch  space  where  a 
unit  of  storage  space  or  closed-pouch  space  was  authorized 
in  one  direction  between  points  on  a  railroad  route.  The 
railroad  made  claim  against  the  mails  for  the  mileage  and 
operation  of  the  full  space  of  the  storage  or  closed-pouch 
unit  for  the  return  movement.     (Id.,  "R.") 


653 

The  Railroads  have  offered  no  sufficient  reason  for  this 
charge.  It  could  only  rest  upon  the  theory  that  it  was 
necessary  for  a  railroad  to  furnish  the  car  and  operate  it 
hi  both  directions  to  fulfill  the  requirement,  and  that  the 
space  operated  in  the  return  movement  was  not  available 
to  the  railroad  and  was  not  used  by  it.  There  is  no  evi- 
dence to  support  any  of  these  propositions. 

Tiie  car-foot  miles  in  this  classification  is  large  in  amount, 
being  over  39,000,000.  The  return  space  is  always  avail- 
able for  the  uses  of  the  railroad  company,  and  the  fact 
that  it  was  used  in  one  direction  by  the  mails  should  not 
compel  the  Department  to  bear  the  burden  in  the  return 
direction,  particularly  as  no  attempt  whatever  was  made 
by  the  Railroads  to  charge  return  space  to  the  baggage, 
miscehaueous,  and  express  services,  which  occupy  space  in 
the  mixed  car  under  precisely  the  same  conditions  as  the 
mails  are  carried,  the  only  difference  in  the  service  being 
the  advantage  to  the  Railroads  that  the  mails  are  specifi- 
cally authorized  in  advance  and  the  company  knows 
exactly  what  is  needed.  In  regard  to  the  failure  of  the 
Railroads  to  place  the  express  and  baggage  upon  a  parity 
in  this  respect  with  their  charges  to  the  mails  something 
will  be  said  hereinafter. 

(i)  Tiie  Railroads  charged  to  the  mails  all  excess  and  un- 
authorized claims  for  units  of  storage  space  or  closed-pouch 
space  where  a  unit  of  storage  space  or  closed-pouch 
space  was  authorized  in  one  direction  between  given 
points  on  a  route  and  a  lesser  unit  of  storage  or  closed- 
pouch  space  was  authorized  in  the  opposite  direction 
between  the  same  points.  The  mileage  representing  this 
operation  for  the  difference  between  the  lesser  authori- 
zation and  the  greater  authorization  for  the  distance  of 
the  return  movement  was  entered  as  a  claim  agahist  the 
mails.     (Id.,  "RM.") 

Substantially  the  same  may  be  said  here  as  was  said  in 
regard  to  the  classification  under  the  "R"  movements, 
but  with  greater  force. 

(j)  The  Raih-oads  charged  agahist  the  mails  all  excess  and 
unauthorized  mail-storage  space  or  closed-pouch  space 
wliere  a  unit  of  mail-storage  space  or  closed-pouch  space 


G54 

was  aiithorizod  in  ono  direction  between  points  on  a  route, 
which  distance  included  a  spur.  The  mileage  for  the  re- 
turn movement  over  the  spur  was  reported  and  claimed 
against  the  mails.     {Id.,  "S.") 

The  same  that  has  been  said  with  reference  to  the  action 
of  the  Railroads  in  regard  to  classification  "E,"  will  apply- 
here. 

(1-)  The  Railroads  charged  to  the  mails  all  excess  and  un- 
.  authorized  storage  space  or  closed-pouch  space  where  a 
railway  post  office  apartment  in  a  combination  car  was 
authorized  between  A  and  B  and  the  railroad  company- 
operated  the  car  unauthorized  and  unused  for  mails  for 
the  further  distance  between  B  and  C.  The  company 
made  a  claim  for  concurrent  unauthorized  operation  of  a 
storage-space  or  a  closed-pouch  unit  over  the  same  mile- 
age.    (7^.,  "X.") 

There  is  no  good  reason  for  charging  space  of  this  charac- 
ter to  the  mails  in  addition  to  charging  the  empty  apart- 
ment-car space.  The  space  in  the  baggage  end  of  car  is 
not  controlled  in  any  way  by  the  Department  and  no 
unused  space  therein  should  be  charged  directly  to  the 
mails.  The  mails  utilize  only  space  that  is  available  and 
the  car  does  not  change  its  character  in  any  respect  because 
of  carrying  the  mails.  It  is  run  for  the  other  services 
primarily. 

(?)  The  Railroads  charged  to  the  mails  all  excess  and 
unauthorized  emergency  mail-storage  space  or  closed- 
pouch  space  where  the  Railroads  reported  emergency  service 
in  mail-storage  space  or  closed-pouch  units  but  such  space 
was  not  authorized  by  the  Department.     {Id.,  "DIS.") 

Space  so  classified  is  that  represented  in  the  space 
disallowed  by  the  Department  for  emergency  space  claimed 
by  the  Railroads.  These  claims  were  verified  from  the 
records  of  the  Department  covering  payments  for  emer- 
gency service  and  found  not  to  have  been  allowed.  There- 
fore the  space  was  improperly  charged  to  the  mails. 


055 

SPECIFIC  INSTANCES  OF  THE  EXCESSIVE  SPACE  CLAIMS 
MADE  BY  THE  RAILROADS  AGAINST  THE  MAILS  IN  ACCORD- 
ANCE  WITH  THEIR  PLAN  ABOVE  DESCRIBED. 

Great  Northern  Railway,  (Post  Office  Department  Exhibit 
No.  84.) 

Witness  McBridefor  the  Department  stated  the  authoriza- 
tions for  service  in  trains  241  and  242  on  mail  route  163510, 
Great  Northern  Railway,  and  described  in  detail  the  excessive 
claims  in  connection  with  apartment-car,  storage,  and 
closed-pouch  authorizations  made  by  the  Railroad  for 
unauthorized  operation  and  unused  space  for  the  mails  in 
apartment,  storage,  and  closed-pouch  space  on  those  trains. 
(Post  Office  Department  Exhibit  No.  84.) 

The  results  of  such  claims  is  shown  in  round  numbers 
on  the  exhibit  to  be  499,000  unauthorized  car-foot  miles 
in  connection  with  155,000  authorized  car-foot  miles. 

In  answer  to  the  question  as  to  whether  he  could  discover 
from  the  graphic  charts — Post  Office  Department  Exhibit 
No.  84,  illustrating  these  excessive  claims^whether  there 
was  any  possible  claim  that  the  Railroad  could  have  made 
which  it  did  not,  the  witness  rephed:  "I  have  been  unable 
to  find  anything  in  connection  with,  this  route  and  most 
routes  that  they  have  not  claimed  in  connection  with  the 
mails."  (Abstract  of  Evidence — Apartment,  Storag'e,  and 
Closed-pouch  Service,  p.  310  swpra.) 

Great  Northern  Railway  (Post  Office  Department  Exhibit  No.  85). 

Witness  McBride  stated  the  authorizations  of  service 
by  the  Great  Northern  Railway  in  trains  209  and  210  on 
route  No.  161525  and  described  in  detail  the  excessive 
claims  made  by  the  company  in  connection  with  apart- 
ment, storage,  and  closed-pouch  authorizations  in  those 
trains. 

The  total  of  such  excessive  claims  is  shown  to  be  46,605 
unauthorized  car-foot  miles  in  comparison  with  25,935 
authorized  car-foot  miles.  In  answer  to  the  question  as 
to  whether  from  the  examination  of  the  graphic  representa- 
tions— Post  Ofhce  Department  Exhibit  No.  85— he  could 
see  any  place  where  the  Railroads  could  have  claimed  more 


G50 

than  they  did  by  any  possible  coni])iiiatioii,  he  re})licd: 
"No;  I  do  not.  It  seems  to  me  that  they  have  chiimed 
everything  they  coukl  possibly  have  claimed."  {Id., 
p.  311,  supra.) 

Chicago,  Hock  Islanu  &  Pacikic  Railway. 

Witness  McBride  stated  the  authorizations  of  service  on 
route  157547,  Chicago,  Rock  Island  &  Pacific  Railway, 
and  described  in  detail  the  excessive  claims  made  in  con- 
nection with  unauthorized  space  operations  by  the  rail- 
road company  in  connection  with  apartment  car,  storage, 
and  closed-pouch  authorizations.  These  several  items  total 
381,570  unauthorized  car-foot  miles.     (/(/,,  pp.  311,  312, 

supra.) 

Norfolk  &  Western  Hailroad. 

Witness  McBride  cited  certain  authorizations  on  route 
114528,  Norfolk  &  Western  Railroad,  and  described  in 
detail  the  unauthorized  space-claims  made  by  the  rail- 
road in  connection  with  authorized  mail  space.  The  total 
of  these  excessive  claims  on  Form  R.  M.  P.  3  for  trains 
15  and  IG  is  658,005  car-foot  miles,  compared  with  a  total 
of  authorized  car-foot  miles  of  579,420.  Among  other 
trains  referred  to  the  witness  noted  ratios  ranging  as  high 
as  30  to  1  between  unauthorized  space  claims  and  space 
authorized  on  train  18.     (Id.,  pp.  313-316,  supra.) 

Cleveland,  Cixcinnati,  Chicago  <&  St.  Louis  Railway. 

Witness  McBride  described  the  manner  in  which  rail- 
roads made  unjustified  and  excessive  claims  of  unauthor- 
ized and  unused  space-operation  in  connection  with 
closed-pouch  space  authorized  a  part  of  the  time,  and 
cited  such  claims  made  by  the  above-mentioned  railroad, 
lliese  excessive  claims  in  this  case  aggregate  26,220 
unauthorized  car-foot  miles  in  comparison  with  1,185 
authorized  car-foot  miles,  a  ratio  of  22  to  1  between 
unauthorized  space-claims  and  space  actually  authorized. 
(Id,  pp.  310,  317,  supra.) 


657 

CASES  WHERE  RAILROADS  MADE  EXCESSIVE  CLAIMS  OF 
UNAUTHORIZED  SPACE  IN  CONNECTION  WITH  AUTHOR- 
IZED CLOSED-POUCH  SPACE,  AND  THE  RATIOS  BETWEEN 
THE    SAME. 

Witness  McBride  submitted  a  table  showing  a  number 
of  railroads,  the  routes  operated,  the  car-foot  miles  of 
authorized  space,  the  car-foot  miles  of  unauthorized 
space  for  which  excessive  claims  were  made,  and  the 
ratios  between  the  authorized  space  and  the  unauthorized 
space  claimed.  Tliese  ratios  run  from  6  to  142  represent- 
ing unauthorized  space  claimed,  to  1  representing  author- 
ized space.     {Id.,  p.  318,  supra.) 

Cleveland,  Cixcixnati,  Chicago  &  St.  Louis  Railway. 

Witness  McBride  stated  an  authorization  on  route 
133516,  Cleveland,  Cincinnati,  Chicago  &  St.  Louis  Rail- 
way, and  described  in  detail  the  excessive  claims  for 
unauthorized  space  movements  in  connection  with  closed- 
pouch  authorizations.  This  was  a  case  where  a  3-foot 
unit  of  closed-pouch  space  was  authorized  on  Sundays 
only  for  18  miles  of  a  total  train  run  of  211  miles.  The 
railroad  claimed  the  operation  of  the  3-foot  unit  not  only 
for  the  18  miles  but  for  the  balance  of  the  211  miles  (193 
miles)  on  Sundays,  and  also  claimed  the  operation  of  space 
equivalent  to  a  3-foot  unit  for  the  remaining  30  days  (the 
week  days  in  the  statistical  period)  over  the  enthe  211  miles 
during  a  period  when  no  mails  were  authorized  in  the  unit. 
The  authorized  car-foot  miles  were  270 :  the  unauthorized  and 
excess  claimed  equaled  21,885  car-foot  miles.  Further- 
more the  report  disclosed  the  fact  that  no  mails  were 
carried  in  the  3-foot  unit  excepting  one  sack  or  package 
consisting  of  a  bundle  of  newspapers  from  Chicago.  Tlie 
ultimate  ratio  of  space  occupied  by  this  bundle  to  the 
space  excessively  claimed  by  the  railroad  was  1  to  3,600. 
(Id.,  p.  321,  supra.) 


Chicago,  Kock  Island  &  Paciiic  and  Other  Lines. 

Witness  McRride  stated  tlio  authorization  on  route 
143508,  Chicago,  Rock  Ishmd  &  Pacific  Railway,  and 
descrihed  in  detail  the  excessive  claims  of  unauthorized 
space  in  connection  with  closed-pouch  authorizations  in 
trains  authorized  to  carry  mails  over  a  portion  of  the 
train-run  only.  In  this  connection  he  submitted  a  table 
showing  the  same  information  for  other  lines  and  stating 
the  ratio  between  the  unauthorized  space  claimed  and  the 
authorized  space  in  each  case.  These  ratios  range  from 
4  to  34  for  unauthorized  space  to  1  foi-  authorized  space, 
(Id.,  pp.  321.  322.  .mpra.) 

EXCESSIVE    CLAIMS    OF    llETURX    .\rOVEMENT    OF    UNAUTHOR- 
IZED   SPACE — CLOSED-POUCII    SERVICE. 

Witness  McBride  described  in  detail  excessive  claims 
for  return  movement  of  unauthorized  space  in  connection 
with  closed-pouch  service  authorizations,  covering  a 
number  of  railroads,  and  submitted  a  table  shownng  the 
authorized  car-foot  miles  and  the  excessive  claims  for  un- 
authorized car-foot  miles,  and  the  ratios  between  them. 
These  ratios  range  from  6  to  12  for  unauthorized  car-foot 
miles  to  1  for  authorized  car-foot  miles.  (Id.,  pp.  323,  324, 
supra.) 

EXCESSIVE  CLAIMS  OF  UNAUTHORIZED  SPACE  OUTWARD  AND 
FN  AUTHORIZED   RETURN    SPACE — CLOSED-POUCH    SERVICE. 

Witness  McBride  described  in  detail  the  character  of 
excessive  claims  of  unauthorized  space  outward  and  un- 
authorized return  space  in  connection  with  trains  carry- 
ing closed-pouch  authorizations  over  parts  of  runs.  He 
submitted  details  with  reference  to  a  number  of  railroads 
and  a  table  showing  the  information,  including  the  au- 
thorized space  and  the  claims  for  unauthorized  space  and 
the  ratios  between  them.  These  ratios  range  from  3  to 
-31  for  unauthorized  car-foot  miles,  to  1  for  authorized 
car-foot  miles.     (Id.,  pp.  325-328,  supra.) 


5o{> 
Pennsylvania  Go.  (Post  Office  Department  Exhibit  86). 

Witness  McBride  stated  a  closed-pouch  authorization 
on  route  131551,  Pennsylvania  Co.,  and  described  in  de- 
tail the  excessive  unauthorized  space  claims  in  connec- 
tion therewith. 

Attention  is  specially  invited  to  the  exhibit  which  shows 
graphically  the  facts  involved.  A  3-foot  closed-pouch 
authorization  was  in  efiFect  for  40  miles,  Pittsburgh  to 
New  Galilee,  for  25  days  of  the  statistical  period.  This 
represented  3,000  authorized  car-foot  miles.  The  rail- 
road, however,  claimed  the  operation  of  the  3-feet  of 
space  for  the  entire  remaining  distance  from  New 
Galilee  to  Chicago,  428  miles,  producing  an  excessive 
claim  therefor  of  32,100  car-foot  miles.  However,  there 
were  10  more  days  during  the  statistical  period  on 
which  mails  were  not  authorized  to  be  carried  in  this 
unit.  Nevertheless  the  company  claimed  the  operation 
of  this  amount  of  space  for  these  10  days  for  the  entire 
distance  between  Pittsburgh  and  Chicago,  468  miles,  pro- 
ducing an  excessive  claim  of  14,040  car-foot  miles. 

But  this  was  not  all.  Notwithstanding  the  fact  that 
the  unit  was  not  authorized  in  the  return  direction  over 
even  the  40  miles,  New  Galilee  to  Pittsburgh,  to  say  noth- 
ing of  the  468  miles,  Chicago  to  Pittsburgh,  the  railroad 
claimed  the  operation  of  thirty-five  3-foot  space  move- 
ments in  the  return  direction  of  the  car  for  the  entire  dis- 
tance from  Chicago  to  Pittsburgh,  468  miles,  producing  a 
further  excessive  claim  of  49,140  car-foot  miles.  The 
total  unauthorized  claim  was  for  95,280  car-foot  miles  and 
the  authorized  operation  produced  3,000  car-foot  miles,  a 
ratio  of  31.8  to  1. 

The  claims  of  the  raiboad  in  this  case  appear  even  more 
preposterous  when  it  is  shown  that  the  average  amount  of 
mail  on  the  train  upon  which  this  3-foot  unit  was  au- 
thorized was  only  one  sack  per  day,  and  which  was  carried 
only  40  miles.     (Id.  pp.  329,  330,  supra.) 


660 

Pennsylvania  Co.  (Post  Office  Department  Exhibit  No. 87). 

Witness  McBride  stated  authorizations  of  a  3-foot  closed- 
pouch  unit  on  route  131551,  Pennsylvania  Co.,  and  de- 
scribed in  detail  the  unauthorized  space  claims  in  connec- 
tion with  such  closed-pouch  space  authorizations.  The 
train  run  in  this  case,  as  in  the  other  case,  was  between 
Chicago  and  Pittsburgh,  a  distance  of  468  miles.  There 
was  a  3-foot  closed-pouch  unit  authorized  between  Gary 
and  Valparaiso,  Ind.,  29  trips,  and  between  Columbia  City 
and  Fort  Wayne,  Ind.,  19  miles.  Unauthorized  movement 
of  the  same  amount  of  space  was  claimed  between  Chicago, 
111.,  and  Gary,  Ind.,  27  miles,  between  Valparaiso  and 
Columbia  City,  Ind.,  85  miles,  and  between  Fort  Wayne, 
Ind.,  and  Pittsburgh,  Pa.,  321  miles.  The  company 
claimed  the  operation  of  3  feet  of  space  for  the  entire 
period  over  the  entire  distance  outbound  and  also  for  the 
entire  distance  on  the  return  trip  of  the  car. 

The  total  authorized  car-foot  miles  were  3,330,  and 
total  unauthorized  car-foot  miles  claimed  were  94,509. 
This  appears  even  more  striking  when  it  is  considered  that 
the  report  shows  that  the  maximum  number  of  pouches 
or  sacks  carried  at  any  one  time  in  the  authorization 
during  the  period  was  9  and  the  minimum  1.  {Id.,  p.  331, 
Post  Office  Department  Exhibit  No.  87,  supra.) 

Cleveland,  Cincinnati,  Chicago  &  St.  Louis  Railway. 

Witness  McBride  stated  certain  closed-pouch  authoriza- 
tions on  route  133516,  Cleveland,  Cincinnati,  Chicago  & 
St.  Louis  Railway,  and  described  in  detail  the  excessive 
unauthorized  space  claims  in  connection  therewith.  (Ab- 
stract of  Evidence,  etc.,  p.  331,  supra.) 

Northern  Pacific  Railway. 

Witness  McBride  stated  a  closed-pouch  authorization  on 
route  171502,  Northern  Pacific  Railway,  and  described  in 
detail  the  excessive  claims  of  unauthorized  space  in  con- 
nection therewith.      (Id.,  d. 322.  swDra.) 


661 

EMERGENCY    SERVICE EXCESSIVE    CLAIMS    OF    UNAU- 
THORIZED   SPACE. 

Witness  McBride  stated  authorizations  upon  the  follow- 
ing named  railways,  and  described  in  detail  the  excessive 
claims  of  unauthorized  space  in  connection  with  emer- 
gency space  authorizations  thereon : 

Alabama  Great  Southern  Railroad;  Denver  &  Rio  Grande 
Railroad;  St.  Louis-San  Francisco  Railway;  Wabash  Rail- 
way; Pennsylvania  Railroad;  Pennsylvania  Company; 
Southern  Railway;  Boston  &  Albany  Railroad;  Cincin- 
nati, New  Orleans  &  Texas  Pacific  Railway;  Pittsburgh, 
Cincinnati,  Chicago  &  St.  Louis  Railway.  (Id.,  pp.  332-338, 
supra.) 

THE    railroads'   METHOD    OF    APPORTIONING   UNOCCUPIED 
SPACE    IN    MIXED    CARS. 

The  unused  space  in  all  mixed  cars  was  apportioned  by 
the  Railroads  on  the  basis  of  the  per  cent  representing  the 
authorized  space  plus  all  unauthorized  and  excess  space 
claimed  in  connection  therewith.  This  carries  over  into 
the  apportionment  of  unused  space  the  effect  of  the  ex- 
cessive claims  made  by  the  Railroads  with  reference  to 
space  to  be  charged  against  the  mails  in  connection  with 
operation.  In  other  words,  the  ratio  on  which  the  Rail- 
roads divided  the  unused  space  in  the  mixed  cars  was 
loaded  unduly  by  charging  to  the  mails  the  excess  claims 
hereinbefore  referred  to. 

(Abstract  of  Evidence — -Excessive  Claims — -The  Rail- 
roads' Apportionment  of  LTnoccupied  Space  in  Mixed 
Cars,  pp.  338-347,  supra.) 

OS   THE  RAILROADS'  THEORY  THEY  COULD  SELL  THE  DEPART- 
MENT SPACE,  REGARDLESS  OF  POSTAL  NEEDS. 

On  their  theory  of  charging  space  to  the  mails  the 
Railroads  could  sell  to  the  Government  any  space  they 
might  have  or  choose  to  operate,  regardless  of  postal  needs, 
and  thereby  not  only  nullify  the  space-basis  system  but 
actually  so  pervert  it  as  to  make  it  the  means  of  securing 
unrestricted  and  excessive  pay  for  the  services  rendered. 

(Abstract  of  Evidence— Excessive  Claims— On  the  Rail- 
roads' Theory  of  Charging  Space,  etc.,  pp.  385,  386,  supra.) 


<562 

SAME    OPKRATION    OF    CARS    UNDER    WEIGHT-BASIS    SYSTEM. 

These  excessive  claims  in  connection  with  the  operation 
of  cars  constituted  an  unjustified  charge  to  the  mails  for 
the  purposes  of  fixing  a  rate  for  the  service,  as  the  same 
cars  would  have  been  operated  in  precisely  the  same  man- 
ner under  the  weight-basis  system,  and  in  fact  were  so 
operated  under  that  system.  Under  the  weight-basis  sys- 
tem the  Railroads  were  compensated  on  the  basis  of  the 
average  daily  weight  carried,  which  reflected  the  service 
actually  performed,  so  far  as  weight  was  concerned. 
Therefore,  to  charge  to  the  mails,  under  a  space-basis  sys- 
tem, the  operation  of  space  in  which  no  weights  of  mails 
were  carried  under  the  weight-basis  system  is  illogical  and 
inconsistent  with  the  facts.  (Abstract  of  Evidence,  pp. 
318,  319,  386,  supra.) 

CASES    REPRESENTATIVE. 

The  cases  detailed  by  the  Department's  witnesses  are 
representative  of  the  manner  in  which  the  Railroads 
reported  and  claimed  excessive  space  operation  against  the 
mails.     (Id.,  p.  329,  supra.) 

THE    METHOD    OF    THE    RAILROADS    VIOLATES    THE    PURPOSE 
OF   THE    STATISTICAL    INQUIRY. 

The  whole  purpose  of  the  statistical  inquiry  with  respect 
to  the  operation  of  space  was  to  ascertain  the  amount  of 
space  necessarily  operated  in  connection  with  the  mail 
service  and  the  other  services  performed  in  passenger 
trains,  in  order  that  the  approximate  ratio  of  such  opera- 
tion for  each  class  of  service  might  be  ascertained  for  the 
purpose  of  applying  such  ratios,  where  appropriate,  to  the 
division  of  expenses  of  operation,  etc.  Therefore  every 
excessive  claim  against  the  mails  for  the  operation  of  space, 
where  such  operation  was  unnecessary  in  the  performance 
of  the  mail  service  and  where  it  was  unauthorized  by  the 
Post  Ofhce  Department  for  that  purpose,  is  improperly 
included  in  the  space  charged  to  the  mails,  and  to  that 
extent  improperly  increases  the  mail  ratio  and  decreases 
the  ratios  for  the  other  services. 


66H 

This  would  he  true  under  ordinary  conditions ;  but  it  has 
special  significance  and  is  entitled  to  special  consideration 
under  the  circumstances  attending  this  inquiry.  Congress 
authorized  the  statement  of  the  railroad  mail  service  upon 
a  space-basis  system  in  accordance  with  specific  units  of 
space  named  in  the  statute.  It  further  provided  for  a  test 
period  during  which  the  Postmaster  General  should  place 
such  routes  upon  the  space  basis  as  in  his  judgment  were 
practicable  and  necessary  in  order  that  the  Commission 
might  properly  determine  the  merits  of  such  space-basis 
system.  It  is  inconsistent  with  the  enactment  and  its 
purpose  that  the  result  of  the  test  which  was  provided  for 
should  be  nullified,  modified,  or  restricted  by  the  fact  that 
the  railroad  companies  had  certain  oversize  car  equipment 
in  their  possession  which  they  had  been  accustomed  to 
operate  under  the  weight-basis  system  and  continued  to 
operate  the  same  under  the  space-basis  system,  charging 
the  excess  space  to  the  mails ;  or  that  the  results  of  a  former 
custom  of  excessive  operation  should  be  charged  to  the 
mails.  The  ver}'  purpose  of  the  test  was  to  show  the  re- 
sults of  economical  authorization  in  conformity  with  the 
new  space  units  authorized  in  the  statute  and  operation  in 
accordance  therewith.  To  permit  the  railroads  to  take 
advantage  of  the  fact  of  possession  of  oversize  cars  and 
charge  to  the  mails  the  results  of  the  old  system  of  un- 
•economical  operation  would  completely  nullify  any  effort 
at  conjparison  between  operation  under  the  old  system  and 
operation  under  the  new  system. 

With  respect  to  the  excessive  claims  for  unnecessary, 
uneconomical,  and  unauthorized  operation  of  cars  over 
distances  and  routes  where  no  mail  authorizations  were 
made,  or  on  days  when  mails  were  not  authorized  to  be  car- 
ried, the  same  principle  applies  as  in  the  case  of  oversize 
cars.  It  is  shown  conclusively  by  the  evidence  both  of  the 
Railroads'  witnesses  and  of  the  Department's  witnesses 
that  under  the  weight-basis  system  excessive  and  uneco- 
nomical operation  of  cars  by  the  railroads,  without  regard 
to  the  authorizations  or  the  necessities  of  the  postal  service, 
was  a  common  practice.  It  was  apparently  no  concern  to 
the  Department  because  such  uneconomical  and  excessive 


(*)()4 

operation  was  not  refiected  in  rates  of  pay  or  in  the  aggre- 
gate compensation  allowed  for  the  transportation  of  the 
mails.  However,  under  the  space-basis  system  the  purpose 
was  to  elhniiuite  from  consideration,  so  far  as  the  mail 
service  is  concerned  in  fixing  pay,  all  such  excessive  and 
uneconomical  operation  of  cars,  in  order  that  the  D(»])art- 
ment  should  pay  for  only  the  service  rendered  it  and  the 
Railroads  should  receive  exact  pay  for  all  the  services  per- 
formed for  the  Department.  To  permit  the  Railroads  to 
charge  against  the  mails  in  this  proceeding  such  excess, 
unauthorized,  and  imeconomical  operation,  for  the  very 
purpose  of  estimating  cost  of  performance,  upon  which 
cost  ultimate  rates  of  pay  shall  be  fixed,  would  be  sub- 
versive of  the  very  principles  involved  in  the  legislation 
and  would  make  the  change  from  weight  basis  to  space 
basis  useless  and  vastly  more  expensive  to  the  Department 
than  the  old  system. 

The  effect  of  these  excessive  charges  of  space  operation 
by  the  Railroads  against  the  mail  service  is  to  increase  the 
car-foot  miles  for  that  service  over  the  authorized  car-foot 
miles  31.2  per  cent.  The  special  importance  of  the  matter 
and  the  radical  effect  upon  the  ratio  of  the  mail  car-foot 
miles  becomes  at  once  evident.  If  the  Railroads  were  suc- 
cessful in  securing  the  acceptance  of  their  plan  of  thus 
charging  excess  operations  to  the  mails,  they  would  add 
to  the  authorized  car-foot  miles  31.2  per  cent,  which  would 
increase  the  Department's  ratio  of  7.28  per  cent  to  .9.1382 
per  cent,  and  the  application  of  this  ratio  in  the  apportion- 
ment of  unallocated  operating  expenses  and  other  ex- 
penses would  increase,  in  the  same  ratio,  the  estimated 
cost  to  the  Railroads  of  performing  mail  service.  If  this 
effort  were  successful  it  would  necessarily  follow  that  such 
an  increase  in  the  cost  must  be  reflected  in  the  rate  for  the 
performance  of  the  service.  Such  a  rate  would  be  as  im- 
fair  and  unjust  to  the  Department  as  are  the  excessive  space 
claims  hereinbefore  detailed  and  upon  which  it  would  be 
based. 

Referen(;c  is  had  to  Abstract  of  Evidence — Excessive 
Claims     [n  (ieneral,  pp.  347-357,  mpra. 


665 

THE  RAILROADS  REPORTED  SPACE  IN  CONNECTION  WITH  THE 
MAILS  ON  AN  ENTIRELY  DIFFERENT  PRINCIPLE  THAN  THEY 
REPORTED  SPACE  IN  CONNECTION  WITH  THE  BAGGAGE, 
THE  MISCELLANEOUS,   AND  THE  EXPRESS  SERVICES. 

If,  upon  any  theory,  the  method  followed  by  the  Rail- 
roads in  reporting  space  operated  in  connection  with  the 
mails  involving  the  excessive  claims  hereinbefore  detailed 
could  be  justified,  such  method  would  necessitate  the  same 
treatment  of  the  baggage  service,  the  miscellaneous  serv- 
ice, and  the  express  service  carried  in  the  same  cars  and 
trains  in  the  same  manner,  as  was  given  the  mails.  But 
t  he  Railroads  did  not  treat  these  services  the  same  as  they  did 
the  mail  service.  They  reported  and  charged  to  the  mails 
every  possible  excess  and  unauthorized  space  movement 
in  both  directions,  but  reported  only  the  actual  space  used 
for  express  and  baggage  and  miscellaneous  services  in  the 
one  direction  separately,  in  the  mixed  cars.  It  has  been 
shown  hereinbefore  that  with  respect  to  the  mails  there 
was  no  possible  claim  which  the  Railroads  could  make 
against  them  that  was  not  made.  The  maximum  authori- 
zation in  the  mLxed  cars  at  any  point  of  the  run  of  a  car 
was  charged  to  the  mails  for  the  whole  distance  of  the  car 
run,  regardless  of  changes  in  authorization  en  route.  Not 
only  was  this  practice  followed  with  respect  to  the  run 
where  the  authorization  was  made,  but  the  maximum 
authorization  in  such  direction  was  charged  on  the  return 
movement  of  that  car,  even  where  no  mail  service  was 
authorized.  With  respect  to  the  express  and  the  other 
services  carried  in  the  mixed  cars,  the  Railroads  reported 
only  the  actual  space  occupied  in  each  direction  separately. 
If  no  express  was  carried  in  the  return  movement  of  the 
car  no  charge  of  space  to  the  express  was  made,  although 
where  no  mails  were  carried  in  the  return  movement  a 
charge  to  the  mails  was  universally  made,  and  that  charge 
was  the  charge  of  the  peak  load  in  the  other  direction. 

These  facts  are  not  only  evidenced  by  the  testimony  of 
the  witnesses  for  the  Department  but  are  freely  and  fre- 
<iuently  admitted   by  all   iho  witnesses  for  the  Railroads 


who  testified  with  reference  to  space  statistics.  With 
respect  to  the  theory  that  the  Railroads  are  entitleil  to  some 
special  consideration  as  against  the  mails,  because  of  a 
supposed  obligation  to  reserve  space  or  to  operate  their 
cars  in  a  special  manner  to  take  care  of  these  authoriza- 
tions, Witness  Wettling  testified  on  cross-examination  as 
follows : 

Question.  Now.  luiving  specilically  located  your  point 
of  difference  between  these  two  services,  1  will  ask  you  if 
you  over  knew  of  a  case  where  it  was  necessary  for  a  rail- 
road company  to  operate  more  in  its  train  consist  than  it 
would  otherwise  liave  operated  in  order  to  get  this  car 
back  to  tlie  initial  point  of  run  to  take  care  of  this  3-foot 
or  7-foot  authorization  of  si)aco  '. 

Answer.  No;  1  suppose  not.  1  would  not  claim  any 
such  ridiculous  thing  as  that. 

(Abstract  of  Evidence,  p.  304,  supra.) 

Further  reference  is  made  to  the  testimony  of  the  wit- 
nesses with  respect  to  this  subdivision — Storage-space 
Service.  (Abstract  of  Evidence — Excessive  Claims,  pp. 
296-307,  swpra.) 

Not  only  is  the  result  of  this  method  grossly  unfair  and 
inequitable  to  the  mails,  but  it  is  inconsistent  with  the 
physical  facts  of  the  service.  There  is  the  same  unused 
space  in  connection  with  express  service  as  is  found  in 
connection  with  the  mail  service,  and  if  the  mail  service 
is  to  be  charged  in  the  manner  described  there  is  no  valid 
reason  why  the  express  and  other  services  should  not  have 
been  treated  in  the  same  manner  in  order  that  they  should 
be  placed  upon  a  parity  with  the  mails. 

Suggestions  were  made  by  a  few  of  the  railroad  witnesses 
that  the  express  service  differed  from  the  mail  service  in 
the  mixed  cars  in  that  the  express  movement  was  fairly 
evenly  balanced.  Tliis  claim  was  completely  disproved 
by  the  testimony  of  Witness  McBride,  who  detailed  to  great 
length  the  conditions  shown  by  the  Railroads'  reports 
during  the  statistical  period  on  many  roads  throughout 
the  entire  country,  such  roads  named  being  representative 
of  the  entire  service.  (Abstract  of  Evidence,  pp.  367- 
376,  supra.) 


067 

The  following  are  examples: 

On  an  Illinois  Central  route,  Chicago  to  Sioux  CMtv, 
express,  eastbound,  761,000  car-foot  miles;  westbound, 
942,000  car-foot  miles:  a  dift'ercnce  of  181,000  car-foot 
miles.  Chicago  and  Northwestern  route,  Des  Moines  to 
Sioux  City,  baggage,  even  trains,  336,000  car-foot  miles; 
odd  trains,  101,000  car-foot  miles:  difference,  235,000 
car-foot  miles.  Miscellaneous,  even  trains,  nothing;  odd 
trains,  42,000  car-foot  miles;  difference,  42,000  car-foot 
miles.  Express  service,  even  trains,  90,000  car-foot  miles; 
odd  trains,  232,000  car-foot  miles;  difference,  142,000 
car-foot  miles. 

Chicago  &  Omaha,  eastbound  trains,  baggage  service, 
6,329,000  car-foot  miles;  westbound,  3,357,000:  a  differ- 
ence of  2,972,000  car-foot  miles.  Miscellaneous  service, 
68,000  car-foot  miles  eastbound  and  96,000  car-foot  miles 
westbound,  a  difference  of  28,000  car-foot  miles.  Express 
service,  eastbound,  1,068,000  car-foot  miles;  westbound, 
1,566,000  car-foot  miles;  a  difference  of  498,000  car-foot 
miles. 

Tliese  are  examples  which  are  representative  of  the 
conditions  on  the  systems  submitted,  which  in  turn  were 
shown  to  be  representative  of  the  conditions  throughout 
the  entire  country. 

Now,  if  these  services  mentioned  had  been  mail  service, 
the  peak  load  would  have  been  charged  in  both  directions 
and  these  differences  enumerated  would  not  appear;  but 
the  Railroads,  while  careful  to  charge  to  the  mails  the 
peak  loads  in  both  directions  regardless  of  service  per- 
formed, made  the  difference  with  reference  to  the  express, 
the  baggage,  and  the  miscellaneous  service  of  charging 
to  such  services  only  the  actual  space  occupied  in  each 
direction  independently  of  each  other. 

The  special  significance  of  this  is  that  the  Railroads' 
handling  of  the  statistics  fails  to  place  the  mail  service 
upon  a  parity  with  the  other  services  performed  in  the 
same  cars  in  the  same  trains,  and  therefore  their  ratio  of 
9.1382  per  cent  representing  the  space  occupied  by  the 
mails  is  untrue  and  unrepresentative. 

Reference  is  had  to  the  testimony  of  the  witnesses  upon 
these  points,  set  forth  in  the  Abstract  of  Evidence  -Exces- 
sive Claims,  etc.,  pp.  358-37<),  supra. 


r>68 

THE    DEPARTMENT'S    CHARGE    OF    SPACE  AND  OPERA- 
TION TO  THE  MAILS. 

The  purpose  of  the  test  period  during  which  tlie  mail 
routes  were  placed  upon  a  space  basis  was  to  enable  the 
Postmaster  General  to  submit  evidence  to  the  Commission 
with  respect  to  the  merits  of  the  space-basis  system  in 
the  conduct  of  the  mail  service  and  payment  therefor. 
The  fundamental  theory  of  the  space-basis  system  is  the 
authorization  of  so  much  space  as  the  Department  requires 
for  the  conduct  of  the  postal  service  and  the  payment  to 
the  Railroads  for  all  the  service  they  perform  in  the  trans- 
portation of  the  mails  and  for  no  more.  The  act  of  July 
28,  1916,  the  space-basis  law,  authorized  such  a  system 
with  such  a  purpose  in  view.  That  statute  prescribed 
certain  units  of  space  as  the  basis  of  authorization  and 
operation.  These  units  and  the  operation  of  them  are 
basic  and  fundamental  in  the  system.  If  they  are  not 
observed,  the  system  fails.  If  they  are  observed  and  the 
purposes  of  the  act  and  the  design  of  Congress  is  carried 
out  they  become  the  basis  for  all  statistics  relative  to  space 
and  operation. 

It  was  not  only  necessary  in  order  to  present  the  merits 
and  possibilities  of  the  space-basis  system  to  the  Com- 
mission that  the  Postmaster  General  should  place  the 
service  upon  a  space  basis  during  a  test  period,  but  in 
order  to  ascertain  the  cost  of  such  service  and  determine  a 
proper  rate  therefor,  it  was  necessary  to  obtain  certain 
statistics  with  reference  to  space  operation.  If  these 
statistics  do  not  represent  the  space  authorized  and  oper- 
ated under  the  authority  of  the  space-basis  act  and  in 
harmony  with  the  spirit  and  intent  of  that  act,  such  sta- 
tistics are  wholly  misrepreseutative  and  of  no  value  in 
this  proceeding.  In  order  that  they  may  be  of  value  and 
be  representative  of  the  mail  service  in  producing  a  ratio 
of  mail  car-foot  miles,  such  statistics  must  conform  to  the 
units  of  authorization  and  they  must  not  include  excessive 
charges  based  upon  the  operation  of  the  larger  sized  units 
which  are  not  contemplated  by  the  act  and  which  the 
companies  happen  to  have  in  their  possession  because  of 
conditions  which  existed  under  the  weight-basis  system. 


669 

Neither  must  they  contain  excessive  operation  or  excessive 
charges  of  car  movements  which  are  not  representative  of 
performance  of  mail  service,  such  as  has  been  detailed 
hereinbefore  as  a  result  of  the  claims  of  the  Railroads  in 
these  respects. 

For  these  reasons  and  because  they  are  fundamental 
and  controlling  in  this  inquiry  the  Department  has  charged 
to  the  mails  the  operation  of  space  in  accordance  with  these 
purposes  and  in  the  following  manner  as  distinguished 
from  the  method  followed  b}'  the  Railroads  above  de- 
scribed : 

SPACE       AXD      OPERATION      AUTHORIZED      DIRECTLY 
CHARGED    TO    THE    MAILS. 

First;  the  space,  and  operation  of  the  same,  actually 
authorized  for  mail  purposes,  has  been  charged  directly  to 
the  mails.  As  pointed  out  hereinbefore,  the  fact  that  the 
Railroads  happen  to  have  equipment  of  larger  size  and 
operate  the  same  in  fulfillment  of  authorizations  pre- 
scribed by  the  statute  can  not  be  considered  in  this  inquiry, 
and  the  operation  of  such  oversize  space  can  not  be  charged 
against  the  mails  without  destroying  the  value  of  the 
statistics. 

Second,  with  respect  to  all  the  excessive,  unauthorized, 
and  unused  space  which  the  Railroads  have  charged  to  the 
mails  and  which  the  Department  has  classified  and  tabulated 
in  Post  Office  Department  Exhibits  Nos.  47  and  48,  the  De- 
partment has  disposed  of  the  car-foot  miles  representing 
these,  together  with  the  car-foot  miles  representing  unused 
space  in  the  passenger  trains  in  accordance  with  the  plan 
detailed  in  Post  Office  Department  Exhibit  No.  65,  plan 
No.  2.     This  plan  in  brief  is  as  follows: 

ASSIGNMENTS   TO    PASSENGER    SERVICE. 

There  was  assigned  to  the  passenger  service  the  car-foot 
miles  of  the  unauthorized  excess  over  authorized  space  in 
full  railway  post  oflice  and  storage  cars  operated  over  au- 
thorized mileage  for  authorized  space  in  such  cars;  of  the 
space  in  full  railway  post  oiUce  and  storage  cars  operated 


670 

by  the  Railroads  but  unauthorized  for  mail  purposes;  of 
the  full  space  in  apartment  cars  operated  by  the  Railroads 
but  unauthorized  for  mail  purposes;  and  of  the  excess 
unauthorized  space  in  full  railway  post  office  and  full  stor- 
age or  baggage  cars  operated  in  fulfillment  of  mail  apart- 
ment or  storage  space  authorizations. 

The  above  excess  and  unauthorized  operations  were 
charged  directly  to  the  passenger  service,  the  mails  liavuig 
no  concern  in  them,  the  operation  having  been  unauthor- 
ized and  unnecessary  for  the  purposes  of  this  test  and  the 
determination  by  the  Commission  of  a  fair  and  reasonable 
rate  for  tlie  performance  of  service  under  a  space-basis 
system, 

APPORTIONMENT    OF    UNAUTHORIZED    AND     UNUSED    SPACE 
IN    MIXED    CARS. 

The  remaining  unauthorized  and  unused  space  (found 
in  mixed  cars)  was  divided  or  apportioned  upon  tlie  ratios 
ascertained,  as  follows: 

For  passenger  service,  the  car-foot  miles  for  baggage 
service  and  for  miscellaneous  service  in  mixed  cars  were 
taken  (the  car-foot  miles  for  passenger  service  proper  are 
not  considered  here  for  the  reason  that  space  reported  of 
that  character  carries  its  own  unused  space). 

For  the  express  service,  the  car-foot  miles  for  express 
service  in  mixed  cars  was  taken. 

For  the  mail  service,  the  car-foot  miles  for  mail  service 
in  miixed  cars,  exclusive  of  the  car-foot  miles  for  railway 
post-office  apartments  was  taken  (the  mail  apartment  car- 
ries with  it  its  own  unused  space). 

The  relation  of  these  totals  for  the  passenger,  express, 
and  mailservices  respectively,  produce  the  ratios  upon  which 
the  apportionment  was  made.  The  apportionment  was  then 
made  by  applying  these  ratios  to  the  remaining  unauthor- 
ized and  imused  space,  by  the  metliod  described  in  Post 
Office  Department  Exhibit  No.  65. 

Reference  is  further  had  to  the  testhnony  oi  witnesses 
upon  points  involved  herein.  (Abstrac;t  of  Evidence — The 
Department's  Assignment,  etc.,  pp.  377-385,  supra.) 


671 

SPECIFIC    CASES   DISCUSSED. 

In  connection  with  the  operation  of  cars  under  the  au- 
thorizations of  the  Department  the  witnesses  discussed 
with  particularity  such  operations  in  connection  with  train 
movements  and  other  conditions,  all  having  a  hearing  upon 
the  respective  contentions  of  the  .Railroads  and  the  De- 
partment regarding  the  claims  made  by  the  Railroads  for 
excessive  operation  of  cars.  They  principally  relate  to 
the  operation  of  full  cars  beyond  divisional  points  where 
authorizations  were  reduced.  These  cases  are  found  imder 
the  heading  "Specific  cases  discussed."  (Abstract  of  Evi- 
dence, pp.  386-410,  supra.) 

I'r/n.NfATE    SPACE    KATIOS    ACCORDING    TO    POST    OFFICE 
department's    ASCERTAINMENT. 

]^ost  Ofiice  Department  Exhibit  No.  36  shows  the  consoli- 
dated statement  of  track  mileage,  tram  mileage,  car  mileage, 
and  car-foot  mileage  by  classes  of  service  performed  in  pas- 
senger trains  dm-ing  the  statistical  period  as  reported  by  the 
companies,  checked  and  tabulated  by  the  Department  and 
stated  in  ultimate  form.  ^Vn  abstract  of  this  exhibit  is 
shown  in  Digest  of  Exhibits,  page  70,71  su2)ra,'m  whichisset 
forth  tlie  totals  for  these  items  for  the  entire  service  on 
passenger  trams.  There  is  further  shown  the  subdivisions 
of  these  totals  to  the  passenger  full  cars  and  passenger 
mixed  cars,  being  72.66  per  cent  of  the  whole;  the  miscel- 
laneous full  cars  and  mixed  cars,  being  2.71  per  cent  of  the 
whole;  the  express  full  cars  and  mixed  cars,  being  12.27 
per  cent  of  the  whole;  the  authorized  mail  full  railway  post- 
office  cars,  the  authorized  mail  full  storage  cars,  the  au- 
thorized mail  mixed  cars,  being  6.1)4  per  cent  of  the  whole; 
also  the  unauthorized  space  claimed  in  connection  with 
full  railway  post-office  and  mail  storage  cars,  the  unauthor- 
ized space  claimed  in  connection  with  mail  in  mixed  cars, 
the  unused  space  claimed  in  connection  with  mail  service, 
and  all  other  unused  space,  being  5.42  per  cent  of  the  whole. 

After  the  Department  had  assigned  and  apportioned  the 
unauthorized  and  unused  space  claimed  in  connection  with 
the  mails  and  all  other  unused  space  in  mixed  cars  to  the 


C72 

sov(M"al  classes  of  sorvico,  as  liereiiibofore  describod,  for 
each  railroad  system  for  which  financial  reports  were  re- 
ceived, and  then  had  consolidated  all  the  car-foot  miles  for 
the  respective  services  for  all  such  systems,  the  space  ratios 
became  as  follows  (Post  Oflice  Department  Plan  No.  2): 

Per  cent. 

Total  passenger,  indiuling  baggage  and  miscellaneous 78.  61 

Total  express 14.  11 

Total  mail 7-28 

This  is  shown  on  Post  Office  Department  Exhibit  No.  66, 
first  sheet,  column  5;  also  on  sheet  No.  2,  line  4,  in  col- 
umns 9,  11  and  13,  where  these  ratios  appear  in  connec- 
tion with  the  consolidated  statement  of  allocated  and 
apportioned  operating  revenues,  expenses,  other  expend- 
itures, and  net  income. 

REVENUE  AND  COST  STATISTICS. 

OPERATING  REVENUES,  OPERATING  EXPENSES  A^D  OTHER 
EXPENDITURES  OUT  OF  OPERATING  REVENUES,  AND 
NET  INCOME  (fOR  THE  MONTH  OF  APRIL,  1917),  FOR 
PASSENGER,    EXPRESS,    AND   MAIL. 

The  object  of  the  selection  of  the  statistical  period  by 
the  Department  and  the  Railroads  and  in  accordance  with 
which  the  Railroads  submitted  their  data  with  respect 
to  the  operation  of  their  passenger  trains  and  the  space 
devoted  therein  to  the  several  services,  and  also  their 
data  with  respect  to  revenue  and  expenses,  was  the  ascer- 
tainment of  the  car-foot  mile  revenue  and  the  estimated 
car  mile  and  car-foot  mile  cost  of  performing  the  several 
services  in  passenger  trains. 

Provision  was  made  by  appropriate  blanks  and  instruc- 
tions issued  in  connection  therewith  for  securing  from 
each  railroad  company  or  system  complete  data  with 
respect  to  their  revenues  and  expenses.  The  plan  pur- 
sued in  accordance  with  which  the  reports  were  to  be 
made  was  agreed  upon  between  the  Department  and  the 
Railroads,  and  for  the  purposes  of  this  inquiry  there  is 
no  material  controversy  between  them,  but  certain  reser- 


673 

vations  were  made  by  each  side,  referred  to  liereiiiafter, 
for  the  treatment  of  the  division  of  certain  expenses,  such 
as  maintenance  of  way  and  structures. 

The  forms  provided  for  allocations  in  accordance  with 
the  Interstate  Commerce  Commission's  instructions  and 
also  for  apportionments  in  accordance  with  the  plan 
agreed  upon.  The  manner  in  which  these  reports  were 
compared,  checked,  and  corrected  by  the  Department 
and  finally  dealt  with  is  set  out  fully  by  Witness  Prentiss 
in  Abstract  of  Evidence,  pages  423-428,  supra. 

The  net  revenues  from  the  mails  as  shown  by  the 
Department's  figures  are  much  less  than  the  actual  net 
revenues  would  be  if  they  were  based  upon  more  exact 
apportionment  of  expenses.  There  are  many  o})erating 
accounts  and  primary  accounts  in  which  it  is  impossible 
to  find  any  relationship  to  the  mail  or  express  services. 
There  are  accounts  in  which  the  mails  and  express  have 
no  part  whatever.  A  division  of  such  expenses  upon  the 
car-foot  mile  ratio  inequitably  charges  a  part  of  such  to  the 
mails.  The  plan  of  apportioning  unallocated  expenses  upon 
this  ratio  was  necessary  in  the  absence  of  a  more  extensive 
and  discriminating  analysis  which  seemed  impracticable  at 
this  time.  The  results  are  submitted  with  the  reservation 
that  they  are  inequitable  to  the  Department. 

The  results  of  the  division  of  expenses  between  freight 
and  passenger,  and  of  the  passenger  expenses  between 
passenger,  express,  and  mail  for  each  road  or  system  was 
shown  upon  Forms  K.  M.  P.  Nos.  70  and  71,  which  is 
identical  in  form  with  the  skeleton  forms  upon  which 
Post  Office  Department  Exhibit  No.  66  is  shown.  There 
was  thereafter  made  a  consolidation  or  recapitulation  of 
all  these  Forms  Nos.  70  and  71  for  the  respective  companies 
or  systems,  for  all  the  data  shown  thereon,  and  the  total 
consolidated  result  was  shown  in  Post  Olhce  Department 
Exhibits  Nos.  66  and  67.  Witness  Prentiss  for  the  Depart- 
ment has  explained  in  detail  the  manner  in  which  these 
exhibits  were  prepared  and  has  specified  the  material 
results  of  the  facts  shown  thereon.  (Abstract  of  Evidence, 
])p.  428-440,  supra.) 

122698—19 43 


6Y4 

Post  Office  Department  Exhibit  No.  66  represents  the 
c'onsohdated  totals  of  information  reported  by  262  carriers 
of  the  first  and  second  class  for  operating  revenues,  operat- 
ing expenses,  other  expenses  payable  out  of  operating 
revenues,  net  income  and  investment  in  property,  divided 
first,  as  between  freight  and  passenger,  and  second,  the 
jKissenger  part  subdivided  by  allocations  and  apportion- 
ments between  passenger,  express,  and  mail  according  to 
Plans  Nos.  1  and  2  of  the  Post  Office  Department.  The 
nuiterial  results  shown  on  this  exhibit  are  set  forth  in  the 
Digest  of  Exhibits,  pages  90,  91,  supra  (Plan  No.  2  of  the 
Department  being  used  in  this  and  all  other  cases). 

There  it  is  shown,  inter  alia,  that  the  operating  revenues 
per  car-mile  were  for  passenger  30.44  cents,  for  express 
20.98  cents,  and  for  mail  22.41  cents;  that  the  operating 
expenses  per  car-mile  were  for  passenger  21.83  cents  and 
for  other  expenses  1.56,  making  a  total  of  23.39  cents;  for 
express  17.07  cents  and  for  other  expenses  1.19  cents, 
making  a  total  of  18.26  cents;  and  for  mails  18.06  cents 
and  for  other  expenses  1.29  cents,  making  a  total  of  19.35 
cents;  and  that  the  net  income  per  car-mile  was  for  pas- 
senger 7.05  cents,  for  express  2.72  cents,  and  for  mails 
3.06  cents. 

Post  Office  Department  Exhibit  No.  67  presents  the 
same  class  of  statistics  taken  and  consolidated  in  Exhibit 
No.  66  as  described  above,  but  for  carriers  of  Class  I  only, 
comprising  138  roads.  The  material  results  are  set  forth 
in  Digest  of  Exhibits,  pages  91 ,  92,  su-pra.  It  is  there  shown, 
inter  alia,  that  the  operating  revenues  per  car  mile  for 
passenger  were  30.46  cents;  for  express  20.99  cents;  and 
for  mail  22.35  cents;  that  the  operating  expenses  per  car- 
mile  were  for  passenger  21.77  cents,  and  for  other  expenses 
1.55  cents,  making  a  total  of  23.32  cents;  for  express 
17.02  cents,  and  for  other  expenses  1.17  cents,  making  a  total 
of  18.19  cents;  and  for  mails  17.99  cents  and  for  other  ex- 
penses 1.28  cents,  making  a  total  of  19.27  cents;  and  that 
the  net  income  per  car-mile  was  for  passenger  7.14  cents; 
for  express  2.80  cents;  and  for  mails  3.08  cents. 

Form  R.  M.  P.  No.  70  provided  for  a  report  as  to  invest- 
ment  in   property.     These   amounts    in    each   case   were 


675 

reported  by  the  several  carriers  and  verified  by  reference 
to  the  annual  report  of  each  carrier  filed  with  the  Interstate 
Commerce  Commission  for  December  31,  1916.  Witness 
Prentiss  in  Abstract  of  Evidence,  pages  432-436,  supra,  de- 
scribes the  manner  in  which  these  reports  were  received 
and  treated. 

It  is  desired  to  call  especial  attention  to  the  fact  that 
the  Post  Office  Department  made  provision  for  securmg 
upon  Form  R.  M.  P.  No.  57  information  from  the  Rail- 
roads with  respect  to  the  value  of  railroad  equipment. 
This  form  provides  for  the  separation  of  the  total  value  of 
the  equipment  between  freight  and  passenger  services  and 
betv/een  the  passenger,  express  and  mail  services  of  the 
value  of  the  passenger  equipment  for  each  carrier. 

The  reports  made  by  the  Railroads  were  very  helpful 
in  more  accurately  assigning  to  the  freight  and  the  passen- 
ger services  in  the  fu'st  instance,  and  in  the  passenger 
service  to  the  passenger  service  proper,  the  express  service, 
and  the  mail  service,  respectively,  the  proper  values  of  the 
equipment  used  in  each  class  of  service.  The  Railroads, 
however,  failed  to  make  use  of  this  information  in  makmg 
their  division  of  value  of  property,  and  by  such  failure 
and  by  the  use  of  theh-  general  ratios  upon  which  they 
divided  property  values,  unduly  increased  the  value  of  the 
property  assigned  to  the  passenger  service  and  that  appor- 
tioned to  the  mails.     (Abstract  of  Evidence,  p.  443,  supra.) 

The  Department  lays  no  stress  whatever  upon  the  re- 
ported value  of  the  investment  in  property,  and  presents 
the  data  with  all  the  reservations  expressed  by  the  Com- 
mission heretofore  in  the  cases  where  these  elements  have 
been  considered.  If  useful  at  all,  they  are  useful  at  this 
time  for  comparative  statistical  purposes  only.  Fm-ther 
reference  will  be  made  hereinafter  to  the  results  shown  in 
this  respect. 

Form  R.  M.  P.  No.  70  (the  second  sheet  of  recapitulation, 
Post  Oflfice  Department  Exhibits  Nos.  66  and  67)  shows  ap- 
portionment of  investment  in  property  to  the  several  classes 
of  services  and  the  per  cent  of  net  income  to  railway  invest- 
ment.    However,  the  cxi)ress  and  mail  revenues,  respec- 


676 

tively,  shown  on  these  sheets,  although  they  were  the 
revenues  reported  by  the  Raih'oads  for  the  statistical 
period,  were  not  the  actual  revenues  received.  The  actual 
revenues  were  shown  by  su])plcmental  reports,  the  results 
of  which  are  stated  on  Form  K.  M.  P.  No.  71  (sheet  1  of 
Post  Office  Department  Exhibits  Nos.  66  and  67) .  (Ab- 
stract of  Evidence,  p.  439,  swpra.) 

The  relation  of  these  actual  revenues  received  to  the 
reported  investment  in  property  is  showai  in  Post  Office 
Department  Exhibit  No.  74,  referred  to  hereinafter. 

COMPARISON    OF    XET    INCOME    WITH    PROPERTY    INVEST- 
MENT. 

In  this  hearing  the  Railroads  submitted  their  statistics 
for  Class  I  carriers  only.  These  same  Class  I  railroads  are 
represented  in  Post  Office  Department  Exhibit  No.  67.  For 
the  purpose  of  showing  the  relation  between  the  actual  reve- 
nues received  for  passenger,  express,  and  mail  services  for 
these  same  carriers  of  Class  I,  and  as  shown  on  sheet  1  of 
Post  Office  Department  Exhibit  No.  67,  to  the  reported  and 
apportioned  investment  in  property  as  shown  on  Exhibit 
No.  67,  Post  Office  Department  Exhibit  No.  74  was  prepared. 
(Digest  of  Exhibits,  p.  94,  swpra.)  The  results  shown  as  to 
per  cent  of  net  income  to  railroad  investment  are  as  follows : 

Passenger,  0.37  per  cent;  express,  0.25  per  cent;  and 
mail,  0.25  per  cent.  These  figures  are  for  the  month  of  April, 
1917.  For  one  year  the  per  cent  of  net  income  to  the  rail- 
way investment  would  therefore  be  for  passenger  4.44  per 
cent,  express  3  per  cent,  and  for  mail  3  per  cent. 

This  Exhibit  No.  74,  sheet  1,  recapitulation  of  Class  1 
carriers,  shows  the  unit  results  as  follows : 

Per  cent  of  net  income  to  operating  revenues  for  passen- 
ger, 19.50;  for  express,  13.34;  and  for  mail,  13.80.  It 
shows  railway  operating  revenues  per  car-mile  for  passenger, 
28.97  cents;  for  express,  20.99  cents;  and  for  mail,  22.35 
cents.  It  shows  expenditm-es  out  of  operating  revenues 
per  car-mile  for  passenger,  23.32  cents;  for  express,  18.19 
cents;  and  for  mail,  19.27  cents.  The  resulting  net  income 
is  therefore  shown  to  ])e  per  car-mile  for  passenger  5.65 


677 

cents;  for  express  2.80  cents;  for  mail  3.08  cents.  (Post 
Office  Department  Exhibit  No.  74  and  Abstract  of  Evi- 
dence, pp.  440-446,  supra.) 

The  second  part  of  sheet  2  of  Exhibit  No.  74  j^ives  a  com- 
parison of  the  income  account  with  investment  in  property, 
Exhibit  No.  66,  form  71,  behig  for  all  carriei-s  of  Class  I  and 
Class  II  represented  in  the  statistics,  instead  of  for  can-iers 
of  Class  I  as  shown  in  Exhibit  No.  67. 

This  sheet  shows  the  following  results : 

Revenue  per  car-mile  for  passenger,  30.44  cents;  for 
express,  20.98  cents ;  and  for  mail,  22.41  cents.  The  car-mile 
rate  for  passenger  is  for  the  whole  revenue  and  the  passenger 
service  train  revenue  is  stated  at  the  bottom  of  column  8, 
at  the  foot  of  the  sheet,  to  be  28.15  cents. 

It  shows  expenditures  out  of  operating  reveimes  per  car- 
mile  to  be  for  passenger  23.39  cents,  for  express  18.26  cents, 
and  for  mail  19.35  cents. 

It  shows  the  net  income  per  car-mile  to  be  for  passenger 
7.05  cents,  for  express  2.72  cents,  and  for  mail  3.06  cents. 

It  shows  the  per  cent  of  net  income  to  operating  revenue  to 
be  for  passenger  23.16  per  cent,  for  express  13  per  cent, 
and  for  mail  13.64  per  cent. 

It  shows  per  cent  of  net  income  to  railway  investment  to  be 
for  passenger  0.46  per  cent,  for  express  0.25  per  cent,  and 
for  mail  0.24  per  cent.  These  last  figures  are  for  reve- 
nues for  one  month,  therefore  for  the  year  the  per  cent  of 
net  income  to  railway  investment  would  be  for  passenger, 
5.52  per  cent;  for  express,  3  per  cent;  and  for  mail,  2.88 
per  cent.  (Post  Office  Department  Exhibit  No.  74,  p.  2,  and 
Abstract  of  Evidence,  pp.  446-448,  suyra.) 

CERTAIN  INCONSISTENCIES  AND  DEFECTS  IN  THE  RAILROADS' 
METHOD    OF    HANDLING    THE    FINANCIAL    DATA. 

There  is  no  dispute  over  the  fact  that  the  reports  of  the 
companies  as  to  their  financial  data  and  the  allocation  and 
apportionment  of  expenditures  on  the  basis  of  the  space 
statistics  as  ascertained  by  the  Department  where  used, 
produced  the  unit  figures  with  respect  to  revenues,  expenses, 


678 

and  net  income  above  stated.  Where  the  Ilaihoads 
secured  other  unit  figures  they  were  produced  by  the  use 
of  space  statistics  loaded  by  the  addition  of  the  excessive 
and  unauthorized  claims  against  the  mails  for  space  opera- 
tion hereinbefore  described,  and  by  certain  methods  now 
to  be  mentioned, 

(a)  Wliile  the  Railroads  had  the  unit  passenger  car-mile 
revenue  for  the  statistical  period  they  used  instead  for  their 
purposes  the  figure  for  the  year,  which  was  larger,  but  did 
not  present  the  results  for  the  mails  for  the  year,  which 
would  have  shown  a  larger  net  income  than  the  statistical 
period  showed. 

(h)  The  unit  revenue  figures  on  Railroad  Exhibit  No.  3 
are  unduly  reduced  by  the  use  of  prorated  car-foot  miles. 
The  Railroads  reached  certain  unit  figures  with  reference 
to  total  passenger  train  operating  revenues  and  expenses, 
express  revenues  and  mail  revenues,  on  the  basis  of 
the  use  of  car-foot  miles  equated  to  a  60-foot  car.  The 
effect  of  that  is  to  reduce  the  car-foot  mile  revenue  in 
all  the  classes  of  service  which  are  performed  in  passenger 
trains.  The  Department  used  instead  of  equated  car 
miles  the  actual  car  miles  as  shown  by  the  statistics  sub- 
mitted. These  car  miles  used  by  the  Department  were 
less  in  number  than  the  equated  car  miles  used  by  the 
Railroads, 

(c)  The  Railroads  apportioned  value  of  property  between 
freight  and  passenger  on  the  ratio  of  operating  expenses, 
but  apportioned  the  value  of  property  to  the  mails  on  the 
basis  of  car-foot  miles. 

(d)  The  Railroads  disregarded  the  rule  recently  followed 
by  the  Commission  with  reference  to  the  division  of  way  and 
structures  expenses  and  divided  such  expenses  on  the 
basis  of  the  locomotive  ton-mile  ratio.  This  produced  a 
much  larger  apportionment  of  these  expenses  to  the  pas- 
senger service  and  consequently  to  the  mail  service  than 
the  method  pursued  by  the  Department,  which  is  de- 
scribed in  Letter  of  Instruction  No.  504  and  was  the  same 
method  used  by  the  Commission  in  the  Western  Passenger 
Fares  Case  (37-1.  C.  C.  p.  22-23). 


679 

The  selection  of  the  locomotive  ton-mile  basis  for 
the  separation  of  the  unapportioned  operating  expenses 
for  the  primary  accounts  under  maintenance  of  way  and 
structures  overweights  the  passenger  operating  expense 
estimate,  and  the  results  produced  from  such  apportion- 
ment on  Railroad  Exhibits  Nos.  3  and  4,  are  at  fault  in 
theory  as  well  as  method,  tlius  increasing  the  estimated 
cost  of  mail  service. 

In  Raih'oad  Exhibits  Nos.  3  and  4  tliere  are  set  out,  in 
addition  to  estimates  based  on  Letter  of  Instruction  No. 
504,  the  same  general  statistics,  but  the  undivided  operat- 
ing expenses  for  maintenance  of  way  and  structures  on 
the  carrier's  reports  were  separated  between  freight  and 
passenger  services  by  the  use  of  ratios  for  locomotive  ton- 
miles. 

The  propositions  advanced  by  tlie  Railroads  in  support 
of  their  method  are  based  upon  the  premise  that  the  use 
of  the  facilities  and  wear  and  tear  thereof  are  equal  for 
each  ton-mile  whether  freight  or  passenger.  Also,  that  the 
relative  cost  of  the  use  and  the  wear  and  tear  is  uniform  for 
both  classes  of  service.  Without  going  into  an  argument  to 
disprove  these  statements  and  to  show  that  the  freight 
locomotive  ton-mile  is  more  destructive  of  the  roadway  fa- 
cilities and  costs  more  for  this  reason  as  well  as  for  the  addi- 
tional switching  and  terminal  maintenance  costs,  it  is  only 
necessary  to  compare  the  train  cost  ratio  for  passenger  with 
the  locomotive  ton-mile  ratio  for  passenger,  both  found 
by  reference  to  Railroad  Exhibit  No.  9  in  the  column 
headed  "Division  of  amounts  not  apportioned."  The  ratio 
for  passenger  train  cost  to  total  train  cost  is  found  to  be 
31.58  per  cent,  while  the  ratio  for  passenger  locomotive 
ton-miles  is  40.18  per  cent,  or  an  increase  of  27.23  per  cent 
over  the  actual  cost  of  passenger  train  operation,  as  nearly 
aU  the  train  costs  are  directly  aUocated  or  known  costs. 
The  directly  allocated  way  and  structures  expenses  give  a 
passenger  ratio  of  only  20.54  per  cent,  or  approximately 
one-haK  of  the  passenger  locomotive  ton-mile  ratio.  In 
view  of  the  many  arguments  sup])orting  a  train  cost  basis 


and  its  use  for  the  purpose  under  consideration,  there 
seems  to  be  no  warrant  for  so  hirgeJy  ovorvv^ei^liting  the 
passenger  expenses  as  the  ratios  above  indicate. 

It  is  therefore  evident  that  the  use  of  locomotive  ton- 
miles  as  the  basis  for  separating  the  undivided  way  and 
structures  expenses  as  set  forth  on  Railroad  Exhibits  Nos. 
3  and  4,  produces  a  result  not  in  harmony  with  the  di- 
rectly allocated  train  costs  or  with  the  direct  labor  charges 
for  operation,  and  does  not  respond  to  varying  conditions 
requiring  additional  expenditures  but  w^ith  slower  traffic 
movement,  thus  producing  less  ton  mileage. 

The  effect  of  the  use  of  the  locomotive  ton-mile  ratio  is 
not  only  to  produce  a  larger  passenger  charge  for  way  and 
structures,  but  also  a  larger  passenger  charge  for  general 
expenses  due  to  the  fact  that  these  expenses  are  appor- 
tioned on  the  ratios  of  all  other  operating  expenses. 

For  the  purpose  of  showing  the  proportion  of  undivided 
expenses  that  have  no  relation  to  traffic,  a  tabulation  of 
certain  of  the  undivided  or  "not  apportioned"  amounts  for 
the  principal  primary  accounts  for  maintenance  of  way  and 
structures  has  been  made  from  the  Interstate  Commerce 
Commission  statistics  of  Class  I  carriers  for  June  30,  1916, 
Statement  No.  40.  The  classification  of  the  accounts  is  in 
accordance  with  the  relation  to  use  and  wear  and  tear  of 
traffic  operations. 


681 


Ac- 
count 
No. 


206 
207 
208 
209 
218 
219 
221 
222 
223 
224 
225 
226 


Primary  account. 


Ezpenses  influenced  by  traffic. 


1  Road\^  ay  maintenance — 

Roadway  depreciation 

i  Track  laying  and  surfacing 

Removing  snow,  ice,  and  sand. 


Expenses  primarily  for  direct  labor 

Expenses  not  primarily  influenced  by  traffic. 


$39,811,156 

410,261 

89,844,954 

6,372,a82 


Tunnels  and  subw  ays 1,  :«1, 732 

Tiumels  and  subwavs,  depreciation 7,019 

Bridges,  trestles,  and  culverts 28, 072, 877 

Bridges,  trestles,  and  culverts,  depreciation '  826, 522 

Ballast • 8, 561, 369 

Ballast,  depreciation 203,485 

Right  of  way  fences '  3, 567,998 

Right  of  way  fences,  depreciation 304 

Snow  and  sand  fences '  387, 735 

Snow  and  sand  fences,  depreciation 198 

Crossings  and  signs •  i,  538, 291 

Crossings  and  siens,  depreciation i  302 

Station  and  office  buildings I  3,380,083 

Station  and  office  buildtags,  depreciation |  1, 572 


$136,439,353 
(42.78%) 


Expenses  for  labor  and  material,  but  due  primarily  i 

to  other  causes  than  traffic " 50, 879, 487 

(1.5.9.^.%) 
Expenses  .lomtwhat  influenced  by  traffic. 

Ties .57, 148, 195 

Ties,  depreciation 1, 059, 610 


Expenses  for  material  due  both  to  traffic  and  other 
causes 


Total  expenses  above  tabulated  (76.99  per  cent). 
Total  expenses  not  tabulated  (23.01  percent).... 


Total  amount  of  expenses  "not  apport  ioned ' 


58,207.805 
(18.26%) 


245,526,645 
73,362,013 


From  the  foregoing  it  is  seen  that  $50,879,487  of  undi- 
vided expenses  have  no  relation  to  traffic  and  that  $58,- 
207,805  have  a  relation  to  traffic  that  is  subject  to  argu- 
ment so  far  as  the  actual  wear  and  tear  is  concerned,  so  that 
over  30  per  cent  of  the  way  and  structures  expenses  to  be 
apportioned  by  use  of  locomotive  ton-milos  may  be  con- 
sidered as  not  influenced  by  use  or  wear  and  tear  of  traffic. 
If  to  this  be  added  the  proportion  for  superintendence, 
amounting  (in  total  unapportioned  column)  to  $21,949,287, 
it  is  seen  that  considerably  over  one-third  of  these  costs 
are  independent  of  traffic  ratios,  but  on  the  contrary,  are 
influenced  by  the  general  trend  of  cost  of  labor  and  mate- 
rial. It  is  also  seen  that  nearly  one-half  of  the  undivided 
costs  (42.78  per  cent)  are  (Hrect  labor  expenditures  in  main- 
taining the  right  of  way.    These  labor  charges  are  due  to 


682 

t  raflic  operations  primarily  and  any  upward  trend  in  price 
of  labor  would  extend  to  them  as  well  as  to  the  train  opera- 
tion. If,  as  has  been  shown,  the  ratio  for  passenger 
expenses  is  rendered  excessive  by  use  of  the  locomotive 
ton-mile  basis,  this  increased  ratio  applied  to  increased 
costs  for  labor  will  overweight  the  passenger  costs  and  thus 
add  to  the  mail  service  the  burden  of  participating  in 
operating  expenses  properly  chargeable  to  freight  service. 

By  reference  to  Railroad  Exhibit  No.  9  it  is  seen  that  the 
column  headed  "Not  related  to  freight  or  passenger"  con- 
tains identical  amounts  for  each  table,  with  the  exception 
of  the  item  for  general  expenses,  which  in  the  table  under 
division  by  locomotive  ton-miles  gives  only  $7,101.89  as 
not  related,  thus  apportioning  to  passenger  service,  at  the 
ratio  of  approximately  27.79  per  cent,  over  $235,000  addi- 
tional cost  due  principally  to  "valuation  expenses."  which 
were  considered  as  "not  related"  in  the  first  table.  This 
amount  when  apportioned  by  use  of  the  ratio  for  mail  of 
9.1382  per  cent,  gives  a  mail  proportion  of  $21,474.77  per 
month  or  approximately  a  quarter  of  a  million  dollars  per 
year,  as  the  table  represents  only  140  Class  I  carriers.  It 
is  contended  by  the  Department  that  this  charge  is  exces- 
sive when  taken  in  whole  for  the  single  month,  and  at  least 
should  be  a  "deferred  charge"  against  operations;  but  in 
the  question  of  rate-making  it  should  be  considered  as 
wholly  unrelated  to  the  case. 

The  same  criticisms  apply  to  the  tables  on  Railroad 
Exhibits  Nos.  3  and  4  based  on  locomotive  ton-miles  as  are 
made  with  regard  to  the  tables  based  on  Letter  of  Instruction 
No.  504  and  train-cost  basis  for  separation  of  expenses  for 
way  and  structures.  The  same  theories  and  methods  were 
used  in  both  calculations,  which  have  been  shown  to  be 
faulty  and  the  results  excessive. 

THE  POST  OFFICE  DEPARTMENT'S  PROPOSED  PLAN  FOR 
RAILWAY  MAIL  PAY. 

On  the  part  of  the  Postmaster  General  and  the  Depart- 
ment it  is  submitted  that  the  operation  of  the  service  under 
the  space-basis  system  has  satisfactorily  established  the 
advantages  and  superior  merits  of  that  system  over  the 


683 

weight-basis  system.  The  facts  briefed  and  set  forth 
hereinbefore  detail  the  particulars  in  which  this  is  true. 
The  space-basis  system  for  the  payment  for  the  service 
performed  by  the  Kailroads  in  the  carriage  of  the  mails 
and  the  performance  of  the  service  in  connection  therewith 
should  be  approved  by  the  Commission. 

Accordingly  the  Post  Office  Department  submitted  at 
the  hearing  a  proposed  plan  for  the  continuation  of  the 
space-basis  system  with  such  changes  and  modifications  as 
the  experience  during  the  operation  of  the  service  under 
such  system  had  suggested.  The  tenns  of  the  proposed 
plan  are  set  forth  in  Post  Office  Department  Exhibit  No. 
76,  pages  95-97,  supra. 

Below  is  a  brief  explanation  of  the  principal  features: 

REGULAR    AUTHORIZATIONS. 

The  proposed  plan  for  making  regular  authorizations 
follows  the  present  plan  with  the  modification  that  a 
change  in  an  apartment  car  authorization  may  be  made 
only  at  points  where  operating  conditions  of  the  train  in 
question  ^vill  permit  it,  under  such  provisions  and  regula- 
tions as  the  Interstate  Commerce  Commission  may  pre-, 
scribe. 

The  operation  of  the  service  under  this  modified  provi- 
sion, and  the  difference  between  such  operation  and  the 
present  practice,  and  also  the  conditions  under  which 
such  changes  of  authorizations  should  be  made,  are  all 
discussed  by  Witness  Brauer  for  the  Department,  which 
discussion  is  found  in  Abstract  of  Evidence,  pages  465-474, 
supra. 

EMERGENCY   AUTHORIZATIONS. 

The  proposed  plan  provides  for  the  authorization  of 
emergency  units  of  space  in  units  of  3,  7,  15,  or  30  feet 
without  duplication  or  grouping.  In  other  respects  the 
present  practice  is  continued. 

This  is  a  change  from  the  present  i)ractice  wlierel)y  the 
units  are  grouped  so  as  to  produce  a  gradation  of  1  foot, 
increase  or  decrease.  This  practice  was  the  subject  of 
much  of  the  criticism  made  by  the  Railroads  at  tJie  hearing 


684 

in  this  case,  and  tlie  Department  l^elieves  that  its  elimina- 
tion is  justified,  not  on  account  of  the  reasons  urged  by  the 
Raih-oads  as  affecting  the  merits  of  the  practice,  but  because 
its  elimination  will  remove  a  cause  of  irritation  and  un- 
necessary detail  in  reporting  and  authorizing  emergency 
units.  It  has  been  found  that  the  use  of  the  units  pre- 
scribed without  duplication  or  grouping  will,  on  the 
average,  produce  substantially  the  same  results  as  the 
system  of  grouping. 

The  explanation  of  the  operation  of  this  change  is  made 
by  Witness  Brauer  for  the  Department  in  Abstract  of 
Evidence,  pages  474-476,  supra. 

Further  provision  is  made  for  the  authorization  of  a 
60-foot  car  to  be  paid  for  on  the  basis  of  the  round  trip 
if  not  used  by  the  carrier  in  the  opposite  direction,  when  a 
regularly  authorized  unit  of  storage  or  closed-pouch  space, 
combined  with  an  emergency  unit,  necessitates  the  use  of 
30  feet  or  more  of  linear  space  in  a  baggage  or  storage  car 
used  exclusively  for  the  mails. 

The  explanation  of  the  operation  of  this  provision  and 
the  particulars  in  which  it  differs  from  the  present  practice 
are  set  forth  in  the  testimony  of  Witness  Brauer  for  the 
Department  in  Abstract  of  Evidence,  pages  476-482,  supra. 

Further  provision  is  made  for  the  authorization  of  the 
next  higher  unit  when  the  regular  authorization  is  exceeded 
60  per  cent  or  more  of  the  trips  during  a  period  of  .30 
consecutive  days. 

Detailed  explanation  of  the  operation  of  this  provision 
is  set  forth  in  the  testimony  of  Witness  Brauer  for  the 
Department  in  Abstract  of  Evidence,  pages  482-484,  supra. 

UNDERSIZED    CARS. 

Provision  is  made  for  payment  at  pro  rata  for  a  railway 
post-office  car  or  an  apartment  car  which  is  deficient  in 
length  but  otherwise  standard.  In  computing  the  pay  the 
major  portion  of  a  foot  will  be  regarded  as  a  full  foot  and 
one-half  of  a  foot  or  less  will  be  disregarded. 

This  eliminates  the  troublesome  practice  in  such  cases 
of  computing  the  pay  on  the  basis  of  inches. 


685 

DEFICIENCY    IN    STOKAGE    SPACE. 

Provision  is  made  for  pro  rata  pay  in  the  same  manner  as 
for  cars  deficient  in  length,  where  the  railway  post-office  car 
or  apartment  car  is  of  standard  length  hut  deficient  in 
storage  space. 

This  eliminates  the  troublesome  practice  of  counting  the 
pouches  and  sacks  that  may  be  carried  in  the  storage  part 
of  the  car  and  the  assignment  of  the  remaining  number  of 
sacks  of  the  quota  proper  to  the  unit  authorized  to  the 
baggage  car  for  the  purpose  of  receiving  the  full  benefit  of 
the  prescribed  storage  space  that  should  be  found  in  the  car. 

OVEKSIZE    CARS. 

Provision  is  made  for  the  authorization  of  storage  units 
on  the  basis  of  actual  measurement,  when  an  oversize  car 
is  furnished. 

This  eliminates  the  troublesome  practice  of  counting  the 
pouches  and  sacks,  and  substitutes  actual  measurement  of 
space  as  the  guide  of  authorization. 

Detailed  explanation  of  the  operation  of  this  provision  is 
given  in  the  testimony  of  Witness  Brauer  for  the  Depart- 
ment, Abstract  of  Evidence,  pages  484-486,  supra. 

SIDE,    TERMINAL,    AND    TRANSFER    SERVICE. 

Provision  is  made  for  compensating  the  railroads  sep- 
arately from  the  line  rate,  for  the  performance  of  side,  termi- 
nal, and  transfer  service,  where  such  service  is  required  by 
the  Post  Office  Department.  The  additional  compensa- 
tion shall  be  the  amount  paid  for  the  service  to  contrac- 
tors and  for  the  value  of  the  actual  time  of  the  Railroads' 
emplo3^ees  while  engaged  in  carrying  the  mails,  and  includes 
reasonable  cost  of  vehicular  service. 

Full  discussion  of  side  and  terminal  service  and  the  rea- 
sons for  continuing  the  practice  of  requiring  the  Kailroads 
to  perform  the  same  under  some  conditions,  are  set  forth 
in  the  testimony  for  the  Department,  Abstract  of  Elvidence, 
pages  486-491,  supra. 


686 


MERGER    OF    RATES. 


Provision  is  made  for  merging  the  initial  and  terminal  al- 
lowances with  the  line  rate. 

By  reference  to  Post  Office  Department  Exhibit  No.  5, 
showing  the  annual  rates  of  line  pay  and  initial  and  terminal 
allowances  by  imits  of  service  authorized  during  the  statis- 
tical period,  the  proportion  of  the  line  rate  and  initial  and 
terminal  allowance  in  each  case  will  be  found.  They  are  as 
follows : 


Class  of  service. 


Line  pay. 


Initial  and 
terminal 
allowance. 


I    Per  cent.       Per  cent. 

60-foot  full  R.  1'.  O.  cars I  95. 35  4. 65 

:iO-foot  apartment  R.  \\  ().  cars ,  90. 26  9. 74 

15-foot  apartment  R.  V.  O.  cars i  73. 10  i  26. 90 

60-foot  storage  cars 96. 73  3.  27 

30-foot  storage  space :  93. 43  6.  57 

lo-foot  storage  space '•  89. 64  10. 36 

7-foot  storage  space 91. 33  8. 67 

3-foot  storage  space 84. 37  15. 63 

7-foot  closed-pouch  space 87. 35  j  12. 65 

3-foot  closed-pouch  space 74. 34  j  25. 66 


The  purpose  of  providing  a  separate  initial  and  terminal 
allowance  was  to  compensate  for  the  short  hauls.  Neither 
the  Department  nor  the  Railroads  found  it  practicable  to 
make  an  ascertainment  of  the  proper  allowance  to  be  made 
in  these  cases.  It  is  doubtful  whether  the  present  allow- 
ances accomplish  the  intended  purpose.  Both  the  Rail- 
roads and  the  Department  have  recommended  the  merger 
of  the  rates. 

Testimony  on  the  part  of  the  Department  is  found  in 
Abstract  of  Evidence,  pages  491-493,  supro. 

THE  RAILROAD'S  PROPOSED  PLAN. 

Railroad  Exhibit  No.  57. 

THE  railroads'  PROPOSAL  FOR  RATES  BASED  UPON  WEIGHTS 
IS  A  RETLTRX  TO  AN  OLD  AND  UNSATISFACTORY  SYSTEM. 

The  Railroads'  proposal  involves  a  return  to  the  old 
system  of  a  double  standard,  but  with  new  features  inequi- 
table and  especially  objectionable  to  the  Department.  It 
attempts  to  recognize  the  space-basis  system  as  applicable 


687 

to  distribution  facilities:  ])iit  for  such  facilities,  limits  the 
Department  to  the  sizes  of  cars  now  constructed  and 
operated  by  the  Railroads,  and  commits  the  operation  of 
the  service  to  those  units  only.  It  provides  excessive,  rates 
for  these  distribution  units,  based,  not  upon  cost,  but  upon 
passenger  car-mile  revenue,  and,  furthermore,  this  rate  is 
to  be  increased  by  the  ratio  of  the  excessive  claims  for 
imauthorized  and  unused  space  made  by  the  Railroads, 
hereinl^efore  described. 

The  plan  attempts  also  to  recognize  the  weight  basis, 
but  differs  from  the  old  plan  in  basing  rates  upon  a  ton- 
mile  instead  of  an  average  dai^y  weight  basis.  Further- 
more, it  provides  for  a  double  payment  for  all  mails  car- 
ried in  the  prescribed  distribution  units — that  is,  payment 
on  the  basis  of  the  distribution  unit  and  in  addition  thereto 
on  the  basis  of  the  weight  of  the  mails  so  carried  in  such 
units. 

The  proposed  rates  do  not  produce  equitable  results  as 
between  the  companies,  and  this  is  evident  from  the  fact 
that  the  Railroads  found  it  necessary  to  couple  with  them 
a  so-called  service  rate  for  closed-pouch  service  in  order 
that  pay  for  such  service  might  be  raised  to  a  level  con- 
sidered adequate.  (Carriers'  Plan  for  Railway  Mail 
Pay — Abstract  of  Evidence,  pp.  494,  495,  supra.) 

THE  railroads'  PROPOSAL  OF  A  3-CENT  RATE  FOR  CLOSED- 
POUCH  SERVICE  IS  AN  UNNECESSARY  COMPLICATION  AND 
UNJUSTIFIED  BECAUSE  PRODUCTIVE  OF  UNREASONABLE 
RESULTS. 

The  Railroads'  proposed  plan  provides  for  an  additional 
service-rate  of  3  cents  per  train-mile  on  short-line  railroads, 
or  branch  trains  of  other  railroads,  and  on  other  trains  of 
other  railroads  not  otherwise  described  where  there  are  no 
postal  clerks  on  the  train  and  the  mails  are  carried  in  the 
baggage  car  and  are  handled  oxclusivelv  by  the  baggage- 
men 

If  it  was  intended  by  this  provision  to  additionally  com- 
pensate the  short  lines  and  give  (hem  additional  pav  for 
the  special  service  of  handling  closed  pouches,  (hat  pur- 


G88 

pose  would  not  he  accomplished.  On  the  contrary,  it  would 
add  comparatively  little  to  the  pay  of  the  short  lines.  On 
the  exclusiveh'  closed-pouch  routes  it  would  add  less  than 
$700,(^00  and  the  sliort  lines  a^  a  whole  would  receive  less 
than  $1,000,000  per  annum,  while  the  large  lines  would 
receive  nearly  .14,000.000  add  tional  pe  •  annum. 

On  the  shoi't  lines  the  baggagemen  ta  :c  on  and  put  off 
mails  at  almost  every  station ;  but  on  the  trunk  lines  there 
are  many  examples  of  trains  carrying  only  closed  pouches 
operating  over  distances  from  200  to  over  1,000  miles,  and 
in  many  instances  a  greater  distance,  where  the  actual 
service  by  the  railroad  beyond  the  hauling  of  the  mail 
amounts  to  little,  the  exchange  points  being  very  few 
and  the  amount  of  work  performed  by  the  baggagemen 
negligible.  The  pay  provided  for  by  the  railroad  plan  at 
3  cents  a  mile  would  be  grossly  disproportionate  to  the 
service  rendered  or  the  benefit  received.  The  plan  would 
produce  remarkable  and  wholly  unjustified  results.  I^'or 
instance,  on  the  Oregon  Short  Line,  train  4  carries  ])ouch 
mail  between  Portland,  Oreg.,  and  Green  River,  Wyo.,  a 
distance  of  931  miles.  On  that  trip  18  exchanges  of  closed 
pouches  are  made  which  would  cost  the  Department 
$10,194.45  per  annum  over  and  above  the  comipensation 
otherwise  received  on  the  basis  oi  the  weight  of  these  iden- 
tical mails  at  weight-basis  rates. 

Other  examples  are  detailed  in  the  evidence;  as,  for  in- 
stance, the  closed-pouch  service  between  Los  Angeles, 
Calif.,  and  Del  Rio,  Tex.,  on  trains  101  and  102,  Southern 
Pacific  Railway,  over  a  distance  of  1,263  miles.  Over  this 
entire  distance  the  mails  are  received  at  only  3  points  and 
delivered  at  only  10  points.  Tliis  service  would  cost  the 
Department  and  pay  the  Railroad  $27,659.70  per  annum 
in  addition  to  the  weight-payment  for  the  identical  mails. 

Numerous  instances  of  this  kind,  resulting  from  the  ap- 
plication of  this  provision  of  the  Railroads,  are  given  in  the 
testimony  of  Witness  McBride  for  the  Department,  llie 
statement  of  the  additional  pay  which  would  go  to  the 
large  systems  is  a  remarkable  showing.  The  items  are  set 
forth  on  pages  502,503  of  Abstract  of  Evidence,  suyra.  They 


G8U 

range  all  the  way  from  $9,000  per  annum  to  $169,000  per 
annum  for  system,  respectively.  This  pay  is  grossly  out 
of  proportion  to  the  services  rendered  by  tiie  l^ailroads  or 
the  benefit  received  by  the  Department. 

The  Department's  objections  to  this  feature,  and  the 
inequitable  results  of  its  application,  are  detailed  by  Wit- 
ness McBride  for  the  Departm<>nt.  (Abstract  of  Evidence, 
pp.  496-505,  supra.) 

THE  railroads'  PLAN  OF  AUTHORIZATION  OF  DISTRIBUTION 
SPACE,    AND    BASIS    FOR    PAY    THEREFOR. 

The  claim  of  the  Railroads  that  their  plan  for  authoriz- 
ing distribution  space  in  accordance  with  the  size  of  cars 
now  constructed  and  operated  would  be  easily  adjusted  to 
distribution  needs  and  eliminate  causes  for  disagreement, 
is  denied  by  the  Department's  witnesses.  Practical  men 
of  the  service  testified  that  the  plan  not  only  would  not 
justify  the  claims  of  the  railroads  in  these  respects  but 
would  be  less  easily  adjusted  to  distribution  requirements- 
and  would  multiply  the  causes  for  disagreement.  The  plan 
provides  eight  different  sizes  of  distribution  units.  It  was 
particularl}'  emphasized  by  the  members  of  the  Bourne 
Commission  that  the  operation  of  the  tliree-unit  plan 
adopted  by  Congress  would  result  in  reducing  the  opportu- 
nities for  controversies  between  the  Department  and  the 
Railroads.  This  feature  was  the  subject  of  much  discus- 
sion from  every  point  of  view  before  a  determination  was 
reached.  The  Railroads'  plan  now  proposed  would  increase 
the  number  of  these  units  from  3  to  8,  whicli  would  increase 
in  the  same  ratio  the  causes  for  possible  disagreement. 

The  plan  would  not  eliminate  causes  for  controversies 
over  authorizations;  the  same  controversies  with  reference 
to  the  discontinuance  of  distribution  space  would  exist 
under  the  proposed  system  as  under  the  old  system. 

Furthermore,  the  plan  recognizes  existing  sizes  of  cars 
as  standard  units  and  would  put  an  end  to  the  standardiza- 
tion of  cars  upon  any  other*  basis.  (Abstract  of  Evidence, 
pp.  505-508,  supra.) 

122G98— 11) 11 


000 

The  Railionds'  basis  for  pay  for  the  distribution  units  of 
space  provided  in  their  |)hin  is  funchinientally  wrong  in 
two  essential  particuUirs,  namely:  First,  the  basis  adopted  is 
not  the  basis  of  cost  plus  a  reasonable  return  or  its  equiva- 
lent, but  is  the  average  car-mile  revenue  for  passenger  ser- 
vice; second,  this  revenue  alone  is  not  taken  as  a  basis  but  is 
im])roperly  increased  by  the  ratio  of  the  excessive  claims 
for  unauthorized  and  unused  space  made  by  the  Railroads 
for  the  several  classes  of  ser^'ice  involved  and  referred  to 
liercinbefore. 

With  respect  to  the  first  objection,  the  plan  abandons 
the  entire  purpose  of  this  inquiry  so  far  as  it  was  expressed 
in  the  efforts  of  the  Department  and  the  Railroads  to  se- 
cure statistical  information  upon  which  to  make  a  cost 
estimate.  No  explanation  has  been  given  by  the  Railroads 
for  this  abandonment  of  the  principle  and  the  methods 
employed.  It  possibly  may  be  found  in  the  fact  that  a  re- 
sult secured  by  the  consideration  of  cost  plus  a  reasonable 
return  as  presented  by  the  Department  necessarily  pro- 
duces a  much  lower  rate  of  compensation  than  the  passen- 
ger car-mile  revenue  plus  the  increases  whicli  the  railroads 
have  used. 

It  is  submitted  that  the  only  conditions  under  which 
car-mile  revenue  could  be  taken  as  a  basis,  with  proper  re- 
ductions, would  be  where  there  were  no  statistics  available, 
or  where  no  ascertainment  had  been  possible  as  to  cost  of 
performance  of  service.  These  conditions  do  not  exist  in 
the  present  inquiry,  and  the  Department  and  the  Railroads 
have  expended  a  large  amount  of  money,  made  a  great 
effort,  and  have  been  subject  to  long  delay  for  the  very  pur- 
pose of  securing  the  necessary  data  and  compiling  the 
statistics  upon  which  a  cost  estimate  could  be  made. 

Furthermore,  the  revenue-car-mile  basis,  representing 
another  class  of  service  which  is  entirely  different  from  the 
mail  service  in  all  essentials  excepting  the  mere  operation 
of  trains,  and  without  any  evidence  whatever  as  to  relation 
between  cost  and  reveime,  is  fundamentally  unsound. 

Not  only  is  the  Railroads'  method  objectional)le  upon 
tliis  ground,  but  the  car-mile-revenne  rate  has  been  aug- 


«91 

meiitcd  by  the  ratio  representing  the  excessive  claims 
based  on  unauthorized  and  unused  space  charged  against 
the  mails. 

For  distribution  space  in  the  full  cars  they  have  increased 
the  passenger-car-mile  revenue  rate  by  4.2  per  cent,  repre- 
senting excessive  claims  for  unauthorized  operation  of  full 
cars.  For  apartments  in  cars  they  have  increased  the 
passenger-car-mile  revenue  rate  by  44  per  cent,  represent- 
ing their  excessive  claims  for  unauthorized  antl  unused 
space  in  connection  with  the  operation  of  those  cars. 

According  to  this  plan  the  Department  must  not  only 
pay  these  excessive  and  unwarranted  rates  for  distribution 
space  which  it  might  need,  but  it  must  pay  the  rates  for 
the  distribution  space  found  in  the  cars  as  now  constructed 
and  operated  by  the  Railroads,  without  regard  to  the  ques 
tion  as  to  whether  such  space  and  operation  in  all  cases 
accurately  measures  the  needs  of  the  Postal  wService.  In 
this  connection  it  should  be  noted  that  the  Railroads'  plan 
proposes  to  require  the  Department  to  pay  for  the  addi- 
tional linear  feet  found  in  the  70-f()ot  car,  although  the 
distribution  facilities  in  such  cars  are  substantially  no 
greater  than  those  provided  in  a  standard  60-foot  car. 
(Abstract  of  Evidence,  pp.  508-512,  supra.) 

THE  railroads'  PROPOSITION  PROVIDES  THAT  THE  DEPART- 
MENT SILVLL  PAY  FOR  THE  MAXIMUM  AUTHORIZATION  OF 
DISTRIBUTION  SPACE  AS  FAR  AS  THE  CAR  IS  ITSED  FOR 
ANY    DISTRIBUTION. 

Not  only  does  the  Railroads'  plan  involve  the  paymejii 
of  i>n  excessive  rate  for  the  units  of  distribution  space  the 
Railroads  happen  to  have,  but  their  plan  further  provides 
that  the  Department  shall  pay  for  the  maximum  author- 
ization of  distribution  space  between  })oints  between  which 
any  distribution  space  is  used  at  all.  Tliis  plan  entirely 
ignores  the  equities  in  favor  of  the  Department  arising 
from  the  actual  needs  of  the  service  and  unjustly  resolves 
all  the  questions  involved  in  favor  of  the  Railroad**  (Ab- 
stract of  Evidence,  pp.  513,  514.  s-upra  ) 


THE  railroads'  PROPOSAL  FOR  WEIGHINGS  IS  SUBJECT  TO 
THE  OBJECTIONS  TO  THE  OLD  SYSTEM,  AND  TO  THE  ADDI- 
TIONAL OBJECTIONS  AGAINST  WEIGHING  BY  RAILROAD 
EMPLOYEES. 

The  Railroads'  plan  of  payment  on  the  basis  of  weights 
involves  the  weighing  of  the  mails,  the  tabulation  of  ^uch 
weights,  and  the  computation  of  the  pound-miles  in  pre- 
cisely the  same  manner  and  to  the  same  extent  as  was 
necessary  under  the  old  weight-basis  system.  A  detailed 
description  of  this  method  and  the  requirements  under  it 
are  stated  by  Witness  McBridc  for  the  Department  in  Ab- 
stract of  Evidence,  pages  520-523,  supra.  This  being  true, 
the  impracticability  of  conductmg  such  a  weighing 
by  means  of  railroad  employees  and  ascertaining  the 
necessary  results  will  become  apparent  upon  a  considera- 
tion of  what  is  involved. 

The  restoration  of  the  w^eight-basis  system  would  again 
bring  to  the  front  all  of  its  deficiencies,  its  lack  of  flexibility, 
and  its  inability  to  compensate  the  Railroads  for  unusual 
conditions  of  service.  The  files  of  the  Department  are  full 
of  cases  where  it  was  impossible  to  recompense  companies 
where  they  were  compelled  to  transport  large  quantities 
of  mail  not  carried  by  them  during  a  weighing  period. 
Such  cases  are  given  in  the  evidence  of  Witness  McBride 
for  the  Department,  Abstract  of  Evidence,  pages  520-523, 
supra.  No  such  difficulty  exists  under  the  space-basis 
system;  in  fact,  one  of  its  conspicuous  advantages  is 
that  every  condition  of  service  is  accurately  and  adequately 
met  and  the  service  performed  paid  for. 

It  is  wholly  impracticable  to  conduct  a  weighing  of  the 
mails  by  railroad  employees  in  the  manner  necessary  to 
produce  the  results  required,  without  substantially  dupli- 
catmg  the  supervision  and  cost  by  the  Post  Office  Depart- 
ment necessary  under  a  weighing  conducted  by  employees 
of  the  Postmaster  General.  There  would  be  no  economic 
advantage,  therefore,  in  utilizing  railroad  employees  to 
weigh  the  mails.  There  are  many  points  at  which  the 
mads  could  not  be  weighed  in  this  manner,  where  theDepart- 
ment  would  still  have  to  employ  weighers  or  require  the 
employees  of  the  Postal  Service  to  conduct  the  weighing. 

It  would  be  practically  impossible  to  secure  and  balance 
the  weights  under  the  railroad  plan.     Investigation  of  dis- 


693 

cropancies  are  always  necessary  under  any  weigliing  sys- 
tem and  these  would  be  unsatisfactory  if  not  impracticable, 
owing  to  frequent  changes  of  personnel  over  which  the 
Department  would  have  no  control.  (Abstract  of  Evi- 
dence, pp.  523-531,  supra.) 

COST   OF    WEIGHING. 

A  return  to  the  weight-basis  system  would  involve  the 
cost  of  weighing  which  has  been  eliminated  under  the 
space-basis  system.  Detailed  evidence  is  given  in  the  rec- 
ord as  to  the  nimiber  of  employees  necessary  to  carry 
on  such  a  weighing  and  tabulate  the  results,  and  the  cost 
is  given  m  the  exhibits.  (Abstract  of  Evidence,  pp.  532, 
533,  supra,  and  Digest  of  Exhibits,  p.  64,  supra.) 

RAILROAD      EMPLOYEES     SHOULD      NOT     BE      PERMITTED     TO 
WEIGH    THE    MAILS. 

Prior  to  1875  railroad  employees  weighed  the  mails 
under  the  ordere  of  the  Postmaster  General.  By  the 
act  of  March  3,  1875,  Congress  abolished  such  weighings 
and  directed  that  the  Postmaster  General  should  have 
the  mails  weighed  by  employees  of  tlie  Post  Office  Depart- 
ment, under  such  mstructions  as  he  should  consider  just 
to  the  Department  and  to  the  .Kailroads.  No  doubt 
Congress  had  sufficient  reasons  for  providing  by  law  for 
this  change.  The  officers  of  the  Department  are  of  tlie 
opinion  that  if  weight  shall  be  determined  the  proper 
measure  'of  service,  it  would  be  inadvisable  to  depart 
from  the  practice  of  the  last  30  years. 

There  are  special  objections  to  weighings  by  railroad 
employees.  The  system  would  involve  complicated 
accountmg  and  multiplication  of  reports.  It  would 
involve  handlmg  a  great  many  reports  and  the  transfer 
of  many  items  from  these  reports  to  some  sort  of  a  consol- 
idating sheet  or  card  for  each  train.  As  an  example  of 
the  work  that  would  be  involved  under  the  .Kailroad's 
plan  the  evidence  shows  an  estimate  of  the  number  of 
r(^ports  to  be  handled  and  the  number  of  entries  to  be 
transferred  to  sheets  or  cards  in  connection  with  the 
weights  on  a  particular  train  for  a  route  named  during 
a  period  of  35  days.  On  the  route  in  question  there  are 
39  points  where  mails  are  received  and  dispatched.     Mul- 


6^ 

tiplyin^  this  by  .'i5  gives  a  result  of  1,365  reports  to  bo 
handled  in  order  to  get  the  weights  for  this  train  for  the 
period.  At  most  stations  mails  are  both  put  on  and  put 
off  and  there  would  necessarily  be  two  reports  for  each 
station,  duplicating  the  above  number  of  reports.  This 
is  in  contrast  with  the  simple  requirements  where  all 
the  weights  are  taken  by  post-office  employees. 

Ii^nder  a  weight  system  which  would  require  the  weigh- 
ing of  all  routes  during  the  same  period  annually,  the 
readjustments  would  be  indefinitely  postponed,  and  the 
pay  to  the  Railroads  could  not  be  stated  for  many  months 
after  the  weighing  occurred.  An  idea  of  the  length  of 
time  that  would  be  required  to  complete  the  tabulation 
and  adjustments  under  an  annual  weighing  may  be  gath- 
ered from  the  Department's  experience  .  in  connection 
with  the  special  weighing  in  the  spring  of  1917.  That 
was  conducted  midtn-  short-cut  methods.  All  railway 
mail  routes  were  weighed  "for  35  days,  and  in  this  respect 
it  is  comparable  with  the  Railroads'  proposed  plan  cover- 
ing the  same  length  of  time.  The  tabulations  and  con- 
solidations connected  with  that  weighing,  notwithstanding 
the  fact  that  there  was  a  very  larger  force  of  clerks  em- 
ployed, consumed  nearly  nine  months  following  the 
completion  of  the  weighing.  In  fact,  covering  both  space 
and  weight  routes,  it  was  not  finished  for  more  than  a 
year.  With  the  use  of  the  best  methods  it  is  esthuated 
that  the  work  in  connection  with  an  annual  weighing 
could  not  be  finished  in  less  than  six  months.  (Abstract  of 
Evidence,  pp.  532-541,  supra.) 

DIVERSIONS     OF     MAILS     GIVE     RISE     TO     UNSETTLED    DIFFI- 
CULTIES. 

The  law  authorizes  the  reweighing  of  diverted  mails 
m  order  that  a  readjustment  of  the  pay  involved  may  be 
made;  but  m  any  event  the  service  cannot  be  stabilized 
immediately  foUowmg  a  diversion  of  the  mails,  and  no 
weighing  can  be  had  which  will  be  representative  until 
that  occurs.  The  result  is,  that  months  may  elapse  before 
the  facts  can  be  secured  and  the  readjustment  made. 

Furthermore,  the  right  of  the  Postmaster  General,  under 
this  statute,  to  weigh  only  the  diverted  mails  as  distin- 


695 

guished  from  all  the  mails  carried  upon  the  route,  has  been 
called  in  question  by  the  Railroads  in  a  test  case  pending  in 
the  courts.  (Abstract  of  Evidence,  pp.  541,  542,  supra. 
Missouri, Kansas  cfc  Texas Ry.Co.v.  U.S.,  Ct  Cl.'No. 32573.) 

UNUSUAL   CONDITIONS    CAN    NOT    BE  MET   UNDER   A  WEIGHT- 
BASIS    SYSTEM. 

All  uimsual  conditions  existing  during  the  weighing 
period  which  affect  the  weight  of  mails  carried  over  a  route 
are  necessarily  reflected  in  the  rate  of  compensation  allow- 
able upon  such  weighings.  In  the  past,  unusual  conditions, 
such  as  floods,  the  San  Francisco  earthquake,  etc.,  hare 
exerted  such  an  influence  upon  the  weights  of  mail  carried 
over  the  respective  routes  that  Congressional  legislation 
has  been  necessary  to  enable  the  Department  to  do  justice 
to  the  carriers.     (Abstract  of  Evidence,  pp.  542-544,  supra.) 

THE  WEIGHT-BASIS  SYSTEM  GIVES  NO  RECOGNITION  TO 
FREQUENCY  OF  SERVICE,  WHICH  IS  EXACTLY  COMPEN- 
SATED   FOR    UNDER    THE    SPACE-BASIS    SYSTEM. 

A  fundamental  defect  in  the  weight-basis  system  is  its  in- 
ability to  give  anv  recognition  to  frequency  of  service. 
This  defect  lies  at  the  very  foundation  of  the  system  and  is 
impossible  of  correction  except  by  the  adoption  of  a 
measure  of  service  gauged  on  space  and  frequency.  The 
space-basis  system  accomplishes  this  as  no  other  device  can. 

The  complete  failure  of  the  weight-basis  system  to  give 
any  consideration  whatever  to  frequency  of  service  is 
shown  by  the  data  ])ublished  in  the  reports  of  the  Post- 
master General  for  the  years  1912,  1913,  1914,  and  1915, 
with  respect  to  the  adjustment  of  compensation  for  carry- 
ing the  mails  on  the  several  railroad-mail  routes  in  the 
TTnited  States.  These  data  contained  in  Table  B  of  the 
reports  cover  the  readjustments  made  for  the  four  contract 
sections. 

A  tabulation  has  been  made  from  the  leports  of  the  fre- 
quency of  service,  by  classification  of  routes  based  on 
average  daily  weights  carried;  such  classification  being  by 
average  daily  weights  named  in  the  act  of  ISTo  to  which  the 
several  rates  of  pay  provided  ))y  that  act  are  a})plied.  The 
results  are  -^hown  in  the  following  tabuhition . 


•  M  -3  lO        (T. 


-SI    S 


<u  -k.        TS 


5^_  O 


SoS 


Sc8 


OoS 


^     :    °  °R 


=  og 


008 


008 


qo8 


OoS 


SoS 


28 


Sog 


(N  'C  -^  !>»  (M  ■*  -H  g  -H 

»o  cc  o  c^  r~-  'C  30  CM 


ic  -r  o  o  ic  o  cc  cc  cc 


2^2«>-2^g- 

S 
1 

S5S22S8S  : 

^f:5:g2S5S^  : 

'^ 

-^  tc  cc  t^  -i-  <:  <N  eo 

S;3S6S?22''-' 


e<HD  ■*  M -^i  CO 


^     a  a  0.01  o>  d  01  o  •6 


69T 


.._...         -H 

1 

qoS 

MM;      1 

s-§ 

'.','.  '.^ '.  ^ 

OoS 

I  III   I      1 

S5*^g 

;  !  :  I  irt    rt 

OoS 

S-S5 

I       I       i       '<M  rH           CO           I 

So8 

! 

:  :  :  :               j 

;S""-^ 

<»       00 

-i-M-:     r       1 

°-2S 

:  ;  ;  :      ;          i 

S""S 

^ 

1 

;  I  I  !  _  01 

'  1 

3o8 

;;;;__! 

S.cS 

^ 

;  1 

s-s 

i 

"T 

1 

:  ;^^^e^    lo 

1  i 

So8 

b 

os-^ci 

> 

=o     K 

M 

'  i 

+;> 



o 

1 

li_ 

1 

OoS 

"S 

N 

:  :  :^„  ;    « 

a> 

£ 

g-§ 

a 

ii(  r^Zi^-rt  ^~ 

o  og 

k; 

g^'s 

:       ■     1 

rHN^      |^(N        t- 

qoS 

B-g 

■■- 

W-.M      .(NC^         O         1 

qo8 

s-s 

—    -m    •mm      o 

Sog 

:     ;         '^ 

s-s 

;    '        •              __, 

SoS 

:  :     :         ^ 

00 -w^ 

1 

•S 

^ 

■S" 

:   s 

o 

B 

t  1 

3  3  s  I  cs    3 

•2 

!  t  I 

1 

1 

i  -^  - 

<~oococ—     O 

^' 

illlil 

098 


2" 


go' 

Si 
■si 

II 


^o8 


°c8 


S..S 


^oS 


^o8 


SoS 


•• 

:  :" 

:  |- 

- 

if 

'^ 

i           : 

1        : 

r-^ 

- 

'.'^  I 

"" 

N 

1 

.-Hrt 

C-) 

'.'^ 

■ 

\ 

; 

'^  ;  ! 

" 

I"^ 

'"' 

'.N^ 

CO 

1 
t 

i 

IN 

>• 

^        o. 


Gf>i> 


JMMARY   BY  AVERAGE  DAILY  WEIGHT  GROUPS. 


1  to  211  pounds 

212  to  519  pounds 

o20to  1,019  pounds 

1,020  to- 1,519  pounds 

1,520  to  2,059  pounds. . . . 

2,060  to  3,559  pounds 

3,560  to  5,079  pounds. . . . 
5,0S0  to  48,103  pounds. . . 
48,104  pounds  and  over. 


Aggregate  number  of  routes 
tabulated 


Total 
number 


Totals  by  contract  sections. 


First.       Second.      Third.      Fourth 


This  tabulation  shows,  for  instance,  that  for  routes 
carrying  an  average  daily  weight  of  from  1  to  211  pounds 
there  were  292  with  an  average  frequency  of  3  to  6  trips 
a  w-eek.  122  wdth  an  average  frequency  of  6.01  to  9  trips 
a  week,  190  mth  an  average  frequency  of  9.01  to  12  trips 
a  week,  etc.  The  great  inequality  of  pay,  considered 
with  reference  to  the  frequency  of  service  w^here  the  same 
average  w-eight  was  carried,  is  shown  throughout  the  table. 
For  instance,  for  routes  carrying  from  5,000  to  48,000 
pounds  average  daily  weight.  3  have  a  frequency  of  3  to  6 
times  a  week,  4  a  frequency  of  6  to  9  times  a  week,  6  a 
frequency  of  9  to  12  times  a  week,  35  a  frequency  of  12  to  15 
times  a  week,  25  a  frequency  of  15  to  18  times  a  week,  29  a 
frequency  of  18  to  21  times  a  week,  42  a  frequency  of  21 
to  24  times  a  week,  53  a  frequency  of  24  to  27  times  a  week. 
25  a  frequency  of  27  to  30  times  a  w^eek,  38  a  frequency  of 
30  to  33  times  a  week,  27  a  frequency  of  33  to  36  times  a 
w^eek,  26  a  frequency  of  36  to  39  times  a  week,  15  a  fre- 
quency of  39  to  42  times  a  w^eek,  1 1  a  frequency  of  42  to  45 
times  a  week,  6  a  frequency  of  45  to  48  times  a  week,  4  a 
frequency  of  48  to  51  times  a  week,  3  a  frequency  of  51  to 
54  times  a  week,  2  a  frequency  of  54  to  57  times  a  week,  1  a 
frequency  of  57  to  60  times  a  week,  1  a  frequency  of  60  to 
63  times  a  week,  etc.  Notwithstanding  this  great  varia- 
tion in  frequency  of  service,  which  means  operation  of 
car-miles  in  carrying  the  same  average  daily  weight,  all 
these  routes  were  paid  substantially  the  same  compensa- 
tion for   the  service  performed. 


700 

For  tostiraony  of  Depart  incut's  witness  upon  the  subject 
of  frequency,  its  nonrccojijuition  by  the  weight-basis 
system,  and  its  complete  recognition  l)y  the  space-basis 
system,  see  Abstract  of  Evideuc-e,  pages  544-547,  supra. 

THE   railroads'    plan   involves   double   payment   for 

CARRIAGE  of  PART  OF  THE  MAILS  AND  THE  TRANSFER  OF 
THE  HANDLING  OF  SOME  MAILS  FROM  THE  RAILROAD  EM- 
PLOYEES TO  THE  POSTAL  CLERKS. 

As  pointed  out  hereinbefore,  the  Raih'oads'  plan  involves 
double  payment  for  all  mails  carried  in  the  distribution 
units.  This  arises  from  the  fact  that  the  plan  provides 
payment  for  not  only  the  distribution  units  as  such,  but 
provides  payment  on  the  weight  basis  for  all  the  mails 
carried  therein. 

The  plan  further  involves  the  transfer  of  the  duty  of 
handling  storage  mails  now  carried  in  baggage  cars,  from 
the  railroad  employees  to  the  postal  employees  where  such 
mails  would  bo  carried  in  the  distribution  units.  (Ab- 
stract of  Evidence,  pp.  547-550,  supra.) 

CONSIDERATION  OF  BASIS  FOR  RATES. 

The  Present  Rates. 

Before  giving  consideration  to  the  question  of  proper 
rates  for  the  carriage  of  the  mails  it  is  desirable  to  call 
attention  to  the  present  rates.  The  maximum  rates  for 
the  several  classes  of  service  are  stated  in  the  act  of  1916 
(Appendix  C,  pp.  764-772)  and  the  various  exhibits  of  the 
Post  Office  Department.  Below  are  stated  the  resultant 
rates  for  mail  service  at  the  statutory  rates,  under  the 
authorizations  as  of  March  27,  1917.  There  is  also  shown 
the  effect  of  space-basis  pay  on  railroad  mail  pay  to  cer- 
tain short  line  railroads.  Reference  is  also  made  to  the 
rates  of  pay  under  the  weight-basis  system. 


TOl 

MAXIMUM  STATUTORY  RESULTANT  RATES  PER  MILE  FOR 
AUTHORIZED  UNITS  AND  UNITS  EQUATED  TO  60-rOOT 
SPACE. 

Post  Office  Department  Exhibit  No.  5  shows,  inter  alia, 
as  of  March  27,  1917,  the  resultant  rates  per  mile  of  service 
authorized  for  each  unit,  as  follows: 

Cents. 

60-foot  full  R.  P.  0.  cars 21.  43 

30-foot  apartment  R.  P.  O.  cars 11.  94 

15-foot  apartment  R.  P.  O.  cars 8.  14 

60-foot  storage  cars 21.  31 

30-foot  storage  space 10.  79 

15-foot  storage  space 5.  72 

7-foot  storage  space 2.  63 

3-foot  storage  space 1.  22 

7-foot  closed-pouch  space 3.  36 

3-foot  closed-pouch  space 1.  99 

When  equated  to  a  60-foot  space  basis  the  rates  are  as 
follows : 

Cents. 

60-foot  full  R.  P.  O.  cars 21.  43 

30-foot  apartment  R.  P.  O.  cars 23.  89 

15-foot  apartment  R.  P.  0.  cars 32.  57 

60-foot  storage  cars 21.  31 

30-foot  storage  space 21.  58 

15-foot  storage  space 22.  88 

7-foot  storage  space 22.  58 

3-foot  storage  space 24.  45 

7-foot  closed-pouch  space 28.  84 

3-foot  closed-pouch  space 39.  82 

Taking  the  rate  for  the  60-foot  railway  post-office  car 
as  the  standard  (100  per  cent),  the  resultant  common-unit 
rates  for  full  and  apartment  railway  post-office  cars  stand 
as  follows : 

Per  cent. 

60-foot  full  R.  P.  O.  cars 100 

30-foot  apartment  R.  P.  O.  cars Ill 

15-foot  apartment  R.  P.  O.  cars 152 

Taking  the  rate  for  the  60-foot  storage  car  as  the  standard 
(100  per  cent),  the  resultant  common-unit  rates  for  storage 
and  closed-pouch  space  stand  as  follows: 


702 


Per  cent. 

60-foot  storage  cars iOO 

30-foot  storage  space ^01 

15-foot  storage  space 10" 

7-foot  storage  space '06 

3-foot  storage  space 115 

7-foot  closed-pouch  space 135 

3-foot  closed-pouch  space 1^7 

The  resultant  ton-mile  rates  for  the  several  units  of 
service,  as  of  the  same  date,  shown  in  Post  Office  Depart- 
ment Exhibit  No.  52  (Digest  of  Exhibits,  etc.,  p.  84, 
supra),  were  as  follows: 

60-foot  K.  P.  O.  cars 8.44 

30-foot  apartment  R.  P.O.  cars 14. 27 

15-foot  apartment  R.  P.  0.  cars oO.  38 

60-foot  storage  cars ■ :  -  '^-25 

30-foot  storage  space ?>.2S 

15-foot  storage  space -i-  07 

7-foot  storage  space 2. 64 

3-foot  storage  space 'j-  07 

7-foot  closed-pouch  space 1  ,  „ 

3-foot  closed-pouch  space i 

EFFECT    OF    SPACE    BASIS    OF    PAY    ON    THE    RAILROAD    MAIL 
PAY   TO    CERTAIN    SHORT-LINE   RAILROADS. 

The  effect  upon  the  pay  to  certain  short-line  railroads 
produced  by  changing  the  basis  of  pay  from  the  weiglit 
system  to  the  space  system  at  the  rates  allowable  in  each 
instance  is  shown  by  Post  Office  Department  Exhibit  No.  13 . 

This  exhibit  shows  the  roads  of  the  character  named  by 
two  classes— (1)  those  50  to  100  miles  in  length  and  (2) 
those  less  than  50  miles  in  length.  The  pay  is  shown  for 
October  31,  1916,  under  the  weight  basis;  for  November  1, 
1917,  under  the  space  basis;  and  for  February  15,  1918, 
under  the  space  basis  after  the  conditions  of  service  and 
pay  become  stable,  and  the  net  increase  or  decrease  over 
or  under  pay  October  31,  1916. 


703 

For  the  class  of  roads  50  to  100  miles  in  length  the  totals 
are  as  follows: 

Pay  Oct.  31,  1916 $476,  246.  36 

Less  pay  on  routes  discontinued  after  Nov.  1 ,  1916 468,  213.  30 

Pay  Nov.  1.  1916 537,  578.  84 

Pay  Feb.  15.  1918 468,  632. 56 

Net  increase 419.  26 

Average  length  of  route miles. .  74.55 

For  the  class  of  roads  less  than  50  miles  the  table  shows 
as  follows: 

Pay  Oct.  31.  1916 $242,  663.  91 

Less  pay  on  routes  discontinued  after  Nov.  1,  1916 241,  041.  98 

Pay  Nov.  1,  1916 M3,  809.  58 

Pay  Fel..  15.  1918 252.  653. 16 

Net  increase 11,  611. 18 

Average  length  of  route miles . .  32. 48 

The  net  total  increase  for  the  two  classes  combined  is 
$12,030.44. 

IfATES    OF    PAY    UXnEK    THE    WEIGHT-BA.SIS    SYSTEM. 

The  rates  of  ])ay  proA'ided  for  by  the  acts  of  1873,  1876, 
1878,  and  1907  (the  statutes  naming  maximum  rates  for 
specified  average  daily  weights  of  mails  carried)  vary 
greath'  per  ton-mile  of  service.  They  are  arranged  on  a 
sliding  scale  applicable  to  200.  500,  1,000,  1,500,  2,000, 
3,500.  5.000  pounds,  and  over  5,000  and  less  than  48.000, 
and  above  48,000  pounds.  The  Postmaster  General  has 
allowed  pay  for  the  intermediate  weights  between  these 
amounts  carried  at  rates  named  in  the  regulation.  (See 
note  following  sec.  1319,  P.  L.  &  R..  1913  ed.)  Such  inter- 
mediate rates  are  ])ro  rata  based  upon  the  rate  named  in 
the  statute  for  the  weight  up  to  the  next  rate  step,  as  $50 
for  499  pounds  subject  to  the  reductions  provided  for. 

Post  Office  Department  Exhibit  No.  1 7  shows  the  ton- 
mile  rates  of  i)ay  when  the  entire  service  was  on  the  weight 
basis,  for  each  class  determined  by  the  weight  steps  named 
in  the  act  of  1873.  Exclusive  of  the  additional  pay  al- 
lowed for  full  railway  post-office  cars  by  the  act  of  1876, 
the  exhibit  sho\Vs  ton-mile  rates  to  run  from  $1.4924  for 
211  pounds  or   less  to  $.0576  for  48,104  ])ounds  and  over. 


704 

liu'liuliii-j;  the  additioual  ])ay  for  full  railway  ])()st-ofrice 
cars  the  toii-milc  rates  run  from  $1.4924  i"(M-  211  ])()Uii(ls  or 
less  to  $0.0661  for  48,104  pounds  and  over. 

When  the  major  part  of  the  railroad  mail  service  was 
stated  on  the  space  basis  of  pay,  a  number  of  the  closed- 
])ouch  routes  were  continued  on  the  weight  basis.  (State- 
ment of  the  Postmaster  General,  pp.  661-687;  Post  Office 
Dei)artment  Exhibits  Nos.  10  and  21.) 

It  is  informing  to  show  the  ratio  of  the  pay  for  this 
service  as  continued  at  the  rates  allowed  for  weight  routes, 
to  tlie  pay  that  would  be  allowed  for  the  same  statement 
of  service  on  such  routes  at  the  rates  allowed  for  space  pay 
under  the  act  of  July  28,  1916.  For  this  purpose  Post 
Office  Department  Exhibit  No.  45  was  prepared  to  show  for 
each  weight  route  and  the  total  for  all,  the  estimated  an- 
nual rate  of  pa}'  on  the  weight  routes  at  space  basis  pay. 
The  ratio  between  estimated  space  basis  pay  as  shown  by 
Exhibit  No.  45  and  the  weight  basis  pay  for  these  routes  is 
43.375  to  64.044. 

Fair  and  Reasonable  Kates  for  the  Service. 

considerations    justifying    lower    than    commercial 

RATES. 

The  conditions  under  which  tlie  Railroads  carry  the  mails 
justify  a  material  reduction  from  a  rate  vjhic%  under  ordinary 
circumstances  would  he  appropriate. 

In  the  construction  and  mamtenance  of  then'  roads  as 
highways  under  public  sanction  the  Railroads  perform  a 
function  of  state.  iOlcott  v.  Supervisors,  16  Wall.,  678, 
694;  Louisville  and  Nashville  R.  R.  Co.  v.  Kentuclcy,  161 
U.  S.,  677,  696;  Lalce  Shore  and  Michigan  Southern  Ry. 
Co.  V.  Ohio,  173  U.  S.,  285,  302;  The  Five  Per  Cent  Case,  31 
I.  C.  C,  357.) 

The  transportation  of  the  mails  is  wholly  unique  and 
is  performed  under  conditions  which  justify  the  considera- 
tion of  rates  upon  bases  different  from  those  applying  to 
other  transportation.     Among  these  are  the  following: 

Railroads  are  not  common  carriers  of  the  mails.  In 
the^  transportation   of   the  mails   they  are  performing   a 


705 

governmental  function.  Banl'cis  Mutual  (asnalty  Co.  v. 
Minneapolis,  St.  Paul  &  S.  Ste.  Marie  Ry.,  117  Fed.,  434; 
54  C.  C.  A.,  608;  Texas  &  Pac.  Ry.  Co.  v.  U.  S.,  28  Ct.  CI. 
379;  Minneapolis  di  St.  L.  Ry.  Co.  v.U.  S.,  24  Ct.  CI.  350; 
Atchison, Topeka  &  Santa  FeRy.  Co.  r.  U.S.,225U.S.,64.0.) 

Under  the  provision  of  the  Constitution  of  the  United 
States  the  Congress  is  given  express  authority  to  estabUsh 
post  offices  and  post  roads.  This  express  authority  and 
the  impUed  authority,  which  is  involved  therein,  gives  to 
Congress  complete  monopoly  of  the  mail  service  to  the  ex- 
tent to  which  it  sees  fit  to  act  by  legislation. 

Congress  by  various  acts  has  provided  for  a  postal 
establishment,  and  has  declared  all  railroads  to  be  post 
roads.     (Appendix  C.) 

Prior  to  the  act  of  July  28,  1916,  Congress  had  not  re- 
quired the  railroads  to  carry  the  mails  under  penalty  for 
refusal.  That  act  made  such  provision  in  connection 
with  the  authority  conferred  upon  the  Postmaster  General 
to  require  such  transportation  of  the  mails  by  railroads 
and  the  incidental  services  in  connection  therewith;  and 
further  providing  that  the  Interstate  Commerce  Commis- 
sion shall  fix  the  fair  and  reasonable  rate  for  such  services. 

The  public  policy  which  has  apparently  determined  the 
action  of  Congress  in  dealing  with  railroad  mail  rates  in  the 
past,  has  distinctly  recognized  the  exceptional  character 
of  the  subject.  In  the  act  of  July  28,  1916,  supra,  this 
recognition  is  still  further  and  s])ecificaUy  expressed  as 
follows : 

In  fixing  and  determining  the  fair  and  reasonable  rates 
for  such  service  the  Commission  shall  consider  the  relation 
existing  between  the  railroads  as  public-service  corporations 
and  the  Government,  and  the  nature  of  such  service  as  dis- 
tinguished, if  there  be  a  distinction,  from  the  ordinary 
transportation  business  of  the  railroads. 

Thus  Congress  has  specifically  referred  these  questions 
to  the  Commission  for  special  consideration  as  to  their 
nature  and  character  and  their  influence  upon  the  fixing 
and  the  determination  of  the  fair  and  reasonble  rates  for 
the  mail  service. 

122098—19 45 


706 

The  service  of  the  transportation  of  the  mails  is  different 
from  any  other  transportation  service  in  certain  essential 
particulars.  Unlike  every  other  service  the  railroads  do 
not  carry  the  mails  as  common  carriers,  but  act  as  agencies 
performing  a  governmental  function.  In  this  respect  no 
other  service  rendered  by  the  railroads  is  comparable  with 
it.  For  this  reason,  as  well  as  others,  the  considerations 
applicable  to  commercial  relations  between  carrier  and 
shipper  are  not  controlling  as  in  other  cases.  Commercial 
rates  have  generally  been  fixed  upon  bases  which  give  con- 
sideration to  many  elements,  including  competition,  long 
and  short  hauls,  the  value  of  the  service,  density  of  traffic, 
density  of  load,  etc.  The  freight  service  is  related  exclu- 
sively to  commerce.  The  mail  service  has  from  its  in- 
ception been  paid  for  at  rates  of  compensation  into  which 
none  of  the  elements  referred  to  have  entered.  There  is 
no  question  of  competition  involved ;  the  influence  of  long 
and  short  hauls  is  not  operative;  the  commodity  is  of  a 
uniform  character  and  homogeneous  in  its  nature ;  there  is 
no  other  commodity  with  which  it  compares  directly  in 
service  rendered  or  character  of  article  transported  except- 
ing express  in  a  measure.  Furthermore  the  mail  service 
is  not  a  commercial  business  in  any  sense,  but  is  a  function 
of  Government.  Neither  is  it  conducted  by  a  utilization 
of  the  same  facilities  which  are  devoted  to  the  freight 
business;  it  is  performed  almost  entirely  in  the  passenger 
trains.  The  function  of  a  passenger  train  is  to  transport 
passengers,  and  only  incidentally  express  and  mails. 

Itt  this  connection  the  facts  recited  in  the  statement  filed 
bv^the  Postmaster  General  herein  are  pertinent,  namely: 

rl'he  carriage  of  the  mails  by  the  railroad  companies  for 
-J^€  Government  can  not  be  considered  as  of  the  same  charac- 
ter of  service  as  that  performed  by  them  as  common  car- 
riers for  the  general  public.  The  railroads  have  received 
"certain  benefits  from  the  States  from  which  they  have 
derived  their  corporate  existence,  and  their  interstate  com- 
Jmerce  is  subj  ect  to  the  regulation  of  the  Federal  Government. 
'Some  of  them  have  received  substantial  aid  from  the  Fed- 
eral Government  by  grants  of  lands  and  otherwise.    They  are 


707 

declared  by  law  to  be  post  roads.  As  mail  carriers  they  are 
agencies  of  tbe  Post  Office  Department,  and  are  performing 
a  governmental  function  in  carrying  the  mails.  The  postal 
business  is  not  carried  on  by  the  Government  for  profit  but 
in  furtherance  of  the  constitutional  power  to  establish  post 
offices  and  post  roads  under  which  it  furnishes  postal 
facilities  to  all  its  citizens.  The  railroads  therefore  may 
not  deal  with  the  Government  as  they  would  deal  with  a 
shipper  who  uses  their  facilities  as  a  common  carrier  for 
profit  or  for  special  individual  advantage.  They  are  not 
only  required  to  act  as  governmental  agencies  but  should 
fulfill  the  obligations  of  that  agency  for  a  consideration  not 
necessarily  measured  by  the  strict  rules  governing  commer- 
cial business.  Furthermore,  the  principle  of  public  utility 
which  justifies  the  railroad  carrier  in  transporting  certain 
commodities  at  rates  lower  than  rates  formed  on  strict 
apportionment  of  cost  because  their  transportation  ren- 
ders possible  the  development  of  then*  property  and  their 
industries  located  along  the  lines  of  their  road,  thus  con- 
tributing largely  to  the  transportation  business  for  which 
the  railroads  are  primarily  constructed,  applies  with  special 
force  to  the  transportation  of  the  mails  which  is  higlily 
essential  to  the  upbuilding  of  communities  and  the  increase 
of  the  carriers'  business,  and,  therefore,  should  be  classed 
among  those  services  which  minister  to  the  development  of 
the  processes  of  production  rather  than  to  the  satisfaction 
of  wants  through  the  transportation  of  the  products,  and 
justifies  a  low  rate. 

Furthermore,  railroads  are  projected  and  built  for  the 
purpose  of  carrying  passengers  and  freight.  The  carriage 
of  the  mails  as  a  part  of  the  industry  of  the  railroads  never 
enters  into  the  calculations  of  any  railroad  enterprise. 
^Vfter  the  road's  construction  the  mails  naturally  follow  as 
an  indispensible  necessity  to  the  prosperity  of  the  road; 
but  the  revenue  received  directly  from  its  transportation 
is  never  a  material  consideration  with  the  carrier. 

Upon  the  principle  of  public  utility,  and  the  weight  to  be 
given  it  in  fixing  rates  for  carrying  the  mails.  Prof.  Henry 
C.  Adams,  professor  of  political  economy.  University  of 
Michigan,  and  former  statistician  of  this  Commission,  in 


708 

his  testimony  before  the  Commission  to  Investigate  the 
Postal  Service,  Fifty-sixth  Congress,  Second  session, 
stated  as  follows: 

If  asked  why  public  utility  should  be  accepted  as  a  con- 
trolling consideration  in  determining  reasonable  compensa- 
tion, a  complete  answer  would  rest  upon  three  points,  as 
follows:  First,  because  of  the  sovereign  character  of  the 
Postal  Service  itself,  which  implies  that  its  administration 
from  beginning  to  end  must  be  such  as  to  safeguard  the 
enduring  and  the  collective  rather  than  the  temporary  and 
the  personal  interests  of  the  people;  second,  because  of  the 
quasi-public  character  of  the  railways,  which  secures  to  the 
Government  the  right  of  regulating  the  charges  for  all 
classes  of  service  according  to  the  prhiciple  of  public  utility; 
and,  third,  because  of  the  different  results  that  would  follow 
the  application  of  the  political  principle  on  the  one  hand 
and  of  the  commercial  principle  on  the  other  (S.  Doc,  vol. 
9,  Railway  Mail  Pay,  p.  195). 

The  railwa vs  undoubtedly  have  the  right  to  insist,  from 
their  point  of  view,  that  the  character  of  the  facilities  fur- 
nished for  the  mail  service  should  be  taken  into  account  in 
fixing  compensation,  and  the  recognition  of  this  right  is 
involved  in  all  that  has  been  said  relative  to  the  commer- 
cial interpretation  of  "reasonable  compensation."  But,  on 
the  other  hand,  the  Government  has  the  right  to  insist  that 
the  transportation  of  mail  is  an  essential  social  function; 
that  it  is  imperative,  not  alone  to  the  present  advantage  of 
the  public,  but  to  the  healthful  and  permanent  develop- 
ment of  the  State.  It  has  the  right  openly,  publich^  and 
without  apology,  to  put  in  practice,  in  the  interest  of  the 
public  at  large,  a  rule  universally  acknowledged  by  railway 
men  in  the  development  of  their  property.  A  railway 
manager  is  willing,  for  example,  to  carry  coal  at  a  very  low 
rate,  even  at  the  risk  of  incurring  loss,  because  he  knows 
that  coal  is  potential  in  industrial  development,  and  that 
what  he  loses  on  the  coal  traffic  becomes  for  him  a  gain  on 
the  transportation  of  high-class  freight,  the  product  of  the 
mills  and  factories  which  the  distribution  of  the  coal  ren- 
ders possible.  The  railway  manager  adjusts  his  charges 
upon  coal  with  a  view  to  the  development  of  industry  in  the 
territory  contributing  freight  to  his  railway  rather  than 
according  to  the  cost  of  transporting  coal. 

Tlie  same  line  of  reasoning  is  pertinent,  even  in  a  higher 
degree,  to  the  transmission  of  intelligence,  l)ecause  the 
means  of  diffusing  intelligence  is  an  essential  consideration 
of  growth  and  development.  As  the  distribution  of  coal, 
which  is  latent  manufacturing  powt^r,  is  essential  to  the 


709 

upbuilding  of  manufactories,  so  the  diffusion  of  intelligence 
is  a  fundamental  condition  of  all  social  and  industrial 
evolution.  Tiie  moaning  of  all  this  is  evident.  When  the 
Government,  in  considering  the  question  of  comj^ensation 
for  carrying  mail,  finds  it  necessary  to  classify  the  mail 
service  in  the  general  schedule  of  services  rendered,  it  will, 
if  it  accept  the  principle  of  public  utility  as  the  ruling  con- 
sideration, conclude  that  the  transportation  of  mails 
should  be  classed  among  those  services  which  minister  to 
the  development  of  the  process  of  production  rather  than 
to  the  satisfaction  of  wants  through  the  trans])ortation  of 
the  products.  Of  all  things  transported  by  rail  intelligence 
is  the  most  essential  to  social  and  economic  advantage, 
and  on  this  account  is  in  the  highest  degree  amenable  to  the 
consideration  of  public  utility  {Id.,  p.  196). 

*  *  *  The  position  of  this  report  is  that  the  private 
interest  in  railway  charges  is  limited  to  the  claim  that  the 
gross  revenue  of  railways  should  be  adequate  to  cover  oper- 
ating expenses,  lixed  charges,  and  a  fair  return  to  stock- 
holders; but  this  sum  having  been  guaranteed,  the  manner 
in  which  this  gross  amount  is  collected  from  the  shippers 
is  a  matter  of  public  policy  and  not  of  private  interest. 

*  *  *  The  application  of  the  principle  of  public 
utility  classifies  mail  transportation  with  freight;  it  classi- 
fies it  among  the  fundamental  or  social  services  of  railways, 
and  it  justifies  an  unusually  low  rate  upon  mail  transporta- 
tion, provided  that  this  is  essential  to  rendering  the  im- 
portant service  undertaken  by  the  postal  department,  and 
provided  that  by  this  adjustment  the  gross  revenue  to  rail- 
ways is  not  so  far  depressed  as  to  deprive  investors  of 
property.     (/tZ.,  p.  197.) 

These  quotations  from  Prof.  Adams  state  the  principle 
clearly.  In  brief,  it  is  that  the  Postal  Service  has  a  sov- 
ereign character  and  its  administration  must  be  such  as  to 
safeguard  the  enduring  and  collective,  rather  than  the 
temporary  and  personal,  interests  of  the  people;  that  be- 
cause of  the  quasi-public  character  of  railways  the  Govern- 
ment has  the  right  to  regulate  charges  according  to  the 
principle  of  public  utility. 

The  railroads  undoubtedly  have  the  right  to  receive 
reasonable  compensation  for  mail  service,  "but,  on  the 
other  hand,  the  Government  has  the  right  to  insist  that 
the  transportation  of  mail  is  an  essential  social  function; 
that  it  is  nnperative  not  alone  to  the  present  advantage  of 


no 

the  ])ublic  but  to  the  healthful  and  permanent  development 
of  the  State.  It  has  the  right  openly,  publicly,  and  without 
apology  to  put  in  practice,  in  the  interest  of  the  public  at 
large,  a  rule  universally  acknowledged  by  railway  men  in 
the  development  of  their  property."  Railways  are  wiUing 
to  carry  special  commodities  at  very  low  rates,  even  at  the 
risk  of  incurring  loss,  because  they  are  potential  in  industrial 
development  and  the  loss  thus  incurred  becomes  a  gain  in 
the  transportation  of  other  commodities  which  the  distri- 
bution of  the  one  renders  possible.  In  the  same  way  the 
transmission  of  intelligence  is  an  essential  consideration 
in  the  growth  and  development  of  the  country  which  sus- 
tains the  railroad,  and  without  which  railroad  construction 
and  operation  would  be  of  small  practical  importance. 
Such  transmission  is  amenable  in  the  highest  degree  to  the 
consideration  of  public  utility  and  justifies  an  unusually 
low  rate  for  mail  transportation,  provided  that  by  this 
adjustment  the  gross  revenue  of  railways  is  not  so  de- 
pressed as  to  deprive  investors  of  property.  That  such 
depression  would  not  result  from  any  reasonable  reduction 
from  a  commercial  rate  is  apparent  from  a  consideration 
of  the  fact  that  mail  earnings  are  a  very  small  per  cent  of 
the  total  operating  revenues  of  railways. 

No  railroad  of  any  importance  could  be  successful  in  its 
operations  without  the  regular,  certain,  and  speedy  trans- 
mission of  the  mails  over  its  line.  It  is  a  truism  which  no 
one  wiU  controvert,  that  practically  all  commercial  and 
industrial  enterprises,  as  well  as  social  intercourse  extend- 
ing beyond  the  neighborhood,  depend  upon  the  mails.  As 
the  community  thus  primarily  depends  upon  the  mails,  in 
a  greater  degree  railroads  so  depend,  as  they  must  rely 
wholly  upon  the  communities  for  whose  business  they  are 
constructed  and  operated.  It  must,  therefore,  be  apparent 
that  no  commodity  transported  is  entitled  to  as  great  con- 
sideration in  the  matter  of  ratemaking  as  the  United  States 
mails. 

If  it  be  argued  that  any  lowering  in  the  rate  for  mail 
service  must  be  met  by  an  increase  in  other  rates,  it  may 
be  rephed  that  this  is  true  from  a  practical  point  of  view 
only  where   the  reduction   is  below   "out-of-pocket"  ex- 


711 

penses,  and  that  the  same  objection  may  l)e  made  against 
every  correspondingly  low  rate  on  other  commodities.  • 

The  foregoing  considerations  should  be  given  their  due 
weight  in  reaching  a  determination  as  to  what  is  a  fair  and 
reasonable  rate  for  the  carriage  of  the  mails.  They  justify 
a  material  reduction  from  a  rate  which  under  ordinary 
conditions  would  be  appropriate.  The  measure  of  that 
reduction  is  left  to  the  sound  judgment  of  the  Commission, 
under  all  the  facts  and  circumstances. 

MAXIMUM    RATES    ON    A    COMMERCIAL    BASIS. 

Subject  to  the  foregoing  qualifications,  which  clearly 
justify  lower  than  commercial  rates  for  the  mail  service,  it 
will  now  be  proper  to  consider  what  maximum  rates  on  a 
commercial  basis  would  be  allowed  for  such  service. 

Upon  sucTi  basis,  and  coraimted  uyon  estimated  cost  and  a 
fair  return,  the  railroads  can  not  he  allmved  more  in  the  aggregate 
for  the  sjjace  routes  than  $oJ^,Jtl5,77S  on  the  basis  ofauthonza- 
tions  of  March  27,  1917,  or  $1^7,520,373  on  the  basis  of  the 
authorizations  of  June  30,  1918,  being  21.5  cents  a  car-mAle. 
If  paid,  at  the  same  ton-mile  rate  which  they  receive  from  the 
express  companies  for  camjing  express,  the  maximum  allow- 
ance u-ould  he  $45 ',170,043  and  the  minimum  $21,836,497. 

The  matter  may  be  considered  on  the  basis  of  cost  of 
service;  but  it  should  be  borne  in  mind  that  this  is  subject 
to  a  number  of  qualifications,  for  cost  need  not  necessarily 
determine  rates,  although  most  rates  have  within  them  the 
element  of  cost.  The  rigid  application  of  cost  of  service  in 
a  final  determination  of  rates  generally,  uninfluenced  by 
other  considerations,  would  revolutionize  all  railway 
traffic.  In  order  that  a  rate  shall  be  just  and  reasonable 
it  need  not  be  fixed  on  a  basis  where  it  will  bear  its  pro  rata 
share  of  all  costs  of  transportation  and  return  on  the  prop- 
erty. Other  elements  as  well  must  be  considered,  and  due 
weight  will  be  given  to  them,  as  well  as  to  cost,  by  the  rate- 
making  power.  This  gives  scope  for  the  exercise  of  "the 
flexible  limit  of  judgment  which  belongs  to  the  power  to 
fix  rates,"  as  declared  by  the  Supreme  Court  of  the  Ignited 
States.  The  special  value  of  cost,  however,  where  such  can 
be  ascertained,  is  comparative.     (Appen(Hxl),pp.777,  778.) 


71-2 

Cost  as  a  rate-basis  should  not  be  cost  resulting  from 
iHioconomical  management  or  operation.  (Appendix  D, 
J).  780.)  Therefore,  in  ascertaining  estimated  costs  of  con- 
ducting the  mail  service,  the  excess  space  in  cars  operated 
for  mails  and  the  unauthorized  operation  of  mail  cars  or 
space,  when  not  required  by  the  Department  or  necessary 
for  the  conduct  of  the  service,  should  not  be  allowed  to 
enter  mto  the  estimate. 

The  element  of  the  A-alue  of  the  service,  in  the  sense  in 
which  the  term  has  been  used  and  has  become  known  in 
rate  making  generally,  will  not  apply  to  the  mail  service. 
But  in  a  broader  sense  it  may  be  considered;  and  reference 
will  be  made  hereinafter  to  its  possible  application  to 
the  benefit  the  Department  receives  in  the  operation  of 
car  space. 

There  should  be  a  reasonable  return  on  the  fair  value  of 
the  property  employed;  but  the  cost,  or  the  present  value 
of  the  railroad  property  devoted  to  the  public  use,  has 
not  yet  been  determined.  The  Commission  has  fre- 
quently commented  upon  the  nature  and  unreliability 
of  the  ])roperty-investment  accounts  of  the  carriers. 
(Appendix  D,  p.  783.)  The  reports  made  by  the  Railroads 
in  this  inquiry  as  to  the  value  of  property,  are  subject  to 
all  the  criticisms  and  reservations  heretofore  noted  by 
the  Commission.  They  are  of  no  value  in  this  case  except 
for  comparative  purposes. 

The  general  rule  that  the  reasonableness  of  a  blanket 
rate  which  shall  apply  to  a  number  of  carriers  can  not  be 
determined  by  considerations  alone  of  the  more  favor- 
ably situated  or  less  favorably  situated  carriers,  but  that 
reasonable  rates  on  typical  lines  are  reasonable  rates  for 
all  lines  (Appendix  D,  p.  784)  is  especially  true  with  refer- 
ence to  the  carriage  of  the  mails.  The  service  should  be 
considered  as  a  whole  and  average  conditions  met  by 
average  rates.  The  question  of  compensation  for  railroad- 
mail  service  has  always  been  considered  by  Congress  on 
general  principles  applying  to  the  entire  service.  This 
no  doubt  has  resulted  largely  from  the  nature  and  the 
character  of  the  service  and  the  general  relations  between 
the  Railroads   and   the  Government  in   the  performance 


713 

of  a  ])urely  governmental  function.  It  seems  to  be 
impracticable  to  treat  the  subject  in  any  different  manner 
at  this  time.  The  conditions  under  which  the  service 
is  performed  being  coextensive  with  the  entire  country, 
and  applying  to  all  mileage  every  day  in  the  year  warrants 
the  treatment  as  one  case.  Therefore,  the  Commission 
will  be  justified  in  fixing  unit  rates  for  the  entire  service 
as  a  whole. 

While  the  Commission  has  held  that  it  knows  no  pro- 
vision of  law  under  which  it  would  be  justified  in  increas- 
ing freight  rates  to  provide  a  return  upon  property  used 
exclusively  in  passenger  service,  or  to  take  care  of  losses 
incurred  in  such  service  and  that  in  their  opinion  each 
branch  of  the  service  contributed  its  proper  share  of  the 
cost  of  operation  and  of  return  upon  property  devoted 
to  the  use  of  the  pubhc,  nevertheless,  with  respect  to  the 
question  of  the  reasonable  rate  for  the  transportation  of 
the  mails,  both  services,  if  need  be,  may  be  taken  into 
consideration  as  an  entirety.  This  would  be  a  reason- 
able rule  because  the  railroads  are  transporting  the  mails 
as  agencies  of  the  Government.  If,  therefore,  in  any 
specific  case,  the  rates  yield  less  than  what  might  be  a 
reasonable  return  when  considered  in  connection  with 
the  passenger  service  alone,  they  would,  nevertheless  be 
proper  rates  if  yielding  a  reasonable  return  when  the 
entire  service  of  the  road  was  taken  into  consideration. 

Space  appears  to  be  the  most  natural  measure  of  service 
for  the  matters  carried  in  the  passenger  trains.  There  are, 
however,  certain  differences  between  the  services  rendered 
which  should  be  represented  in  differences  in  rates  of 
compensation  for  the  same.  For  instance,  the  service 
rendered  passengers  on  a  basis  of  space  alone  can  not  be 
adequately  measured  in  comparison  Avith  the  service  ren- 
dered in  the  carriage  of  the  mails.  The  compensation 
derived  from  the  carriage  of  passengers  on  the  basis  of 
space  should  be  much  greater  per  unit  of  service  than  ior 
carrying  the  mails  or  express;  or  stated  conversely,  the 
Government  should  not  be  required  to  pay  for  the  carriage 
of  the  mails  the  same  rate  per  car-mile  as  the  carrier 
receives  in  revenue  per  car-mile  for  the  passenger  service, 
but  should  pay  mucli  less. 


714 

As  between  the  mail  and  the  express,  the  space  basis 
appears  to  be  the  best  measure  for  comparison.  The  com- 
modities are  substantially  alike,  outside  of  first-class  cor- 
respondence. Rates  should  be  varied  to  compensate  for 
the  diiferences  in  the  services  rendered  to  each  by  the 
carrier. 

In  addition  to  the  basis  of  space  for  a  comparison  of 
rates  for  mails  and  express,  if  the  Commission  desires  to 
consider  weight  with  space,  this  element  may  be  presented 
in  the  ton-mile  rate  paid  the  carriers  by  the  Government 
for  the  carriage  of  the  mails  and  the  ton-mile  rate  paid  to 
the  railroad  c(mipanies  for  the  carriage  of  express  matter 
in  the 'trains. 

The  Department's  estimate  of  the  cost  of  the  service  is 
based  upon  the  use  of  the  property  devoted  to  its  per- 
formance. Wherever  dependent  upon  the  ratio  of  space 
operated  in  passenger  trains  such  ratio  is  secured  by  con- 
siderhig  the  car-foot  miles  operated  in  the  performance  of 
mail  sei-vice  in  comparison  with  the  total  car-foot  miles 
operated  m  passenger  trams. 

It  is  in  connection  with  this  ratio  that  a  principal  con- 
troversy in  this  case  arises.  The  Department  insists  that 
a  proper  cost  estimate  can  be  made  only  upon  a  consider- 
ation of  the  space  actually  necessary  and  used  in  connec- 
tion with  the  transportation  of  the  mails.  It  is  upon  this 
basis,  and  upon  a  proper  participation  m  the  unused  space 
in  mixed  cars  common  to  all  services,  that  the  Depart- 
ment's ratio  of  7.28  per  cent  is  secured.  The  reasons  why 
the  excessive  claims  of  the  railroads  of  unauthorized  and 
excessive  operation  of  space  in  connection  with  the  mails 
should  not  be  accepted  as  forming  any  part  of  the  mail 
car-foot  miles,  have  been  fully  stated  hereinbefore.  Cost, 
therefore,  should  be  estimated  upon  the  principles  fol- 
lowed by  the  Department  and  by  the  use  of  the  space 
ratio  ascertained  by  it. 

In  givmg  consideration  to  the  benefit  received  by  the 
Department  from  the  use  of  the  property  employed  hi  the 
performance  of  service,  the  use  or  nonuse  by  the  Depart- 
ment of  the  space  charged  to  it  must  be  taken  into  account. 
Space  operation  which  is  not  necessary  in  connection  with 


715 

such  transportation,  confers  no  benefit  whatever  upon  the 
Department.  Such  operation  is  of  no  vahie  in  point  of 
service  to  the  mails.  This  is  the  general  character  of  the 
excess  and  unauthorized  space  operation  charged  by  the 
Railroads  to  the  mails.  Therefore,  in  estimating  the  costs 
of  the  mail  service,  the  excessive  space  operation  charged 
to  it  by  the  Railroads  can  not  properly  be  considered. 

Passenger  trains  are  made  up  with  reference  to  the 
space  necessary  to  perform  the  services  for  which  such 
trains  are  operated.  Primarily  they  are  operated  to 
carry  passengers,  but  incidentally  they  carry  mails  and 
express.  The  adoption  of  the  space  basis  for  the  ascer- 
tainment of  an  estimated  cost  is  therefore  most  liberal  to 
the  railroads,  but  upon  such  a  basis  of  cost  ascertainment 
and  consequent  fixing  of  rate  no  space  should  be  charged 
to  the  mails  which  is  not  necessary  or  incidental  to  their 
carriage.  Under  a  space-basis  system  the  space  to  be 
considered  is  the  space  prescribed  by  the  statute  and 
authorized  by  the  Department  for  the  service  needed.  If 
the  space  basis  be  adopted  as  a  method  of  payment  the 
Railroads  wiE  undoubtedly  conform  their  equipment  to 
the  authorized  units,  if  they  think  any  injustice  is  done 
them  in  operating  the  larger  units  for  the  pay  received. 
It  necessarily  follows  that  the  rates  should  not  be  fixed 
upon  any  basis  of  space  as  charged  by  the  Railroads  and 
which  disiegards  these  facts. 

Therefore,  if  a  mail  rate  is  to  be  predicated  upon  the 
cost  of  service,  the  Department's  estimate  of  such  cost  made 
as  a  result  of  this  statistical  inquiry  will  furnish  the  basis  as  a 
starting  point.  Inasmuch  as  the  inquiry  was  made  upon 
the  service  as  a  whole  without  any  differentiation  of  its 
parts,  any  estimate  upon  which  a  rate  is  to  be  based  must 
start  with  a  cost  representing  the  aggregate  for  the  entire 
service;  and  inasmuch  as  the  Department  proposes  uni- 
form unit  rates  for  all  classes  of  service,  such  rates  may  be 
deduced  from  the  aggregate  cost  and  adequate  return 
considered  in  connection  with  the  total  car-miles  of  service 
represented  thereby. 

Accordingly  the  Dejiartment  has  computed  such  aggre- 
gate i)ay  for  the  carriage  of  the  mails  based  uj)on  its  esti- 


716 

mate  of  cost,  ])lus  an  amount  representing  the  same  ratio 
of  return  above  cost  which  the  Kaih'oads  receive  for  the 
carriage  of  express,  and  from  this  aggregate  considered  in 
connection  with  the  total  car-miles  represented  bj"  the 
several  units  of  serAace,  has  deduced  a  uniform  rate  per 
car-mile.  These  results  are  shown  in  Post  Office  Exhibit 
No.  81   (Digest  of  Exhibits,  pp.  98-100,  supra). 

In  this  exhibit  the  aggregate  cost  is  computed  for  the 
3^ear,  based  upon  the  mail  operating  expenses  (column  9, 
recapitulation  Form  No.  71,  Exhibit  No.  66),  plus  other 
expenses  out  of  revenue  (column  12,  recapitulation  Form 
No.  71,  Exhibit  No.  66).  The  sum  of  these  represent  all 
the  actual  and  the  estimated  cost  of  performing  mail 
service  by  the  Railroads. 

Inasmuch  as  in  addition  to  cost  there  should  be  a  fair 
return  on  the  use  of  the  property  employed,  the  question 
arises  as  to  what  the  measure  of  that  should  be.  We  are 
not  without  a  reasonable  guide  in  this  respect.  The  sta- 
tistical inquiry  developed  many  important  facts,  a  number 
of  which  concern  the  relations  between  the  Railroads  and 
the  express  service,  as  well  as  between  the  Railroads  and 
the  mail  service.  The  Railroads  entered  into  voluntary 
relations  with  the  Express  Companies  by  which  they 
received  an  agreed  proportion  of  the  express  revenue.  In 
accordance  with  the  contracts  between  the  Railroads  and 
the  Express  Companies,  the  Railroads  in  a  measure  control 
the  amount  which  they  shall  ultimately  receive.  The 
service  rendered  by  the  Railroads  in  the  carriage  of  express 
is  practically  the  same  which  they  render  the  Department 
in  the  carriage  of  the  mails.  Both  express  and  mails  are 
carried  in  the  same  passenger  trains  and  often  in  the  same 
cars.  Any  difference  in  the  cost  of  transportation  of  these 
two  commodities  is  accurately  measured  and  ascertained 
by  the  results  of  the  statistical  inquiry.  Therefore,  having 
charged  to  the  mails  the  full  estimated  cost  of  carrying 
them,  the  fair  and  reasonable  proposition  to  charge  to  the 
mails  in  addition  thereto  would  be  the  same  relative  net  in- 
come which  the  Railroads  received  for  the  carriage  of  express. 
This  net  income  for  express,  as  ascertained  by  this  statis- 
tical inquiry,  is  shown  by  Post  Office  Department  Exhibit 


717 

No.  66  to  be  2.72  cents  per  car-mile.  B3'  applying  this  to 
the  car-miles  performed  in  the  mail  service  and  extending 
it  to  a  year  the  total  net  income  to  be  added  to  the  total 
cost  of  service  is  ascertained.  These  figm-es  extended  to 
cover  the  entire  service  produce  a  result  as  an  annual  rate 
of  pay  of  $54,415,778.96,  as  based  upon  the  authorizations 
of  service  as  of  March  27,  1917.  This  is  comparable  with 
the  annual  rate  of  pay  carried  by  such  authorizations,  and 
as  shown  on  Post  Office  Department  Exhilnt  No.  5  as 
$59,753,679.21 ;  that  is  to  say,  the  amount  of  compensation 
paid  .the  Railroads  as  under  the  authorizations  of  March 
27,  1917,  was,  on  this  basis,  $5,337,900.25  greater  than  a 
fair  and  reasonable  rate.  On  the  same  basis  the  annual 
rate  of  pay  carried  by  the  authorizations  on  June  30,  1918, 
of  $52,180,052.27,  as  shown  by  Post  OfHce  Department 
Exhibit  No.  8,  would  be  reduced  to  $47,520,373.61. 

Tlie  Department  has  proposed  a  merging  of  the  line 
rates  and  the  initial  and  terminal  allowances  into  one  rate 
without  the  distinction  now  made.  It  also  proposes  a  uni- 
form car-mile  rate  for  all  classes  of  units  of  space  for  the 
reason  that  the  conditions  under  which  the  service  is  per- 
formed do  not  appear  to  justify  the  differences  which  now 
exist  in  the  statutory  rates  and  as  they  are  shown  in  the 
resultant  rates  hereinbefore  mentioned.  Tlierefore,  based 
upon  this  aggregate,  the  unit  car-mile  rate  would  be  the 
quotient  secured  by  dividing  into  this  aggregate  annual 
pay  the  total  car-miles  performed  in  the  service  repre- 
sented thereby.  Tliis  produces  a  unit  car-mile  rate  of  21.5 
cents.  Part  II  of  Post  Ofhce  Department  Exhibit  No.  81 
sets  forth  for  each  class  of  service  performed  in  the  several 
prescribed  units  of  space,  the  car-miles  of  service,  the  uni- 
form rate  per  mile  of  service,  and  the  aggregate  annual  rate 
of  pay  therefor,  upon  this  basis. 

Under  no  system  of  ascertainment  of  pay  based  upon 
cost  and  a  fair  return,  can  the  Railroads  be  allowed  a 
larger  amount  than  the  above  named,  on  principles  apply- 
ing strictly  to  commercial  business  and  rates.  As  shown 
above,  such  rates  should  be  materially  reduced  because  of 
the  special  considerations  applying  to  the  mail  service. 


ns 

The  above  result  is  based  upon  the  fuuHngs  made  upon 
the  figures  and  the  theory  of  the  statistical  iiiciuiry.  This 
theory  primarily  involved  an  ascertainment  of  estimated 
cost  based  upon  the  measure  of  space-operation,  so  far  as 
it  was  necessary  to  apply  the  same  where  direct  allocations 
of  cost  could  not  be  made. 

There  is,  however,  another  basis  for  an  estimate,  namely, 
the  ton-mile  revenue-.  By  arrangement  with  the  Railroads 
and  the  Express  Companies,  the  Department  secured  from 
the  Express  Companies  statistics  showing  for  each  of  the 
classifications  of  express  matter  the  ton-mile  revenue, 
among  other  things,  computed  from  a  tabulation  made 
from  waybills  selected  during  the  statistical  period.  The 
result  is  shown  in  Post  Office  Department  Exhibit  No.  37. 
The  payments  to  the  Railroads  per  ton-mile  shown  by  this 
exhibit  (Part  I)  for  the  several  classifications  of  express 
matter  are  set  forth  in  Digest  of  Exhibits,  page  72,  supra. 
In  Post  Office  Department  Exhibit  No.  69  these  payments 
to  the  Railroads  per  ton-mile  for  express  matter  of  the 
several  classifications  are  applied  to  the  ton-miles  per- 
formed in  the  several  units  of  mail  service.  A  number  of 
combinations  are  set  forth  in  this  exhibit,  to  which  special 
reference  is  made.  The  results  are  as  follows,  equated  on 
the  basis  of  cost  per  car-mile  for  mail  and  express,  respec- 
tively : 


719 


3c.SS"S  ■ 


=     S     S     S 


—      no 


PL, 


i  3!  lO  Ol  >0  X' 


5&; 


30r^  O  ?3iOMC 


Oh::-'     _  - 


lOOUyJ  ftftgvj: 


:d^4 
iiJd 


3   O   O  .J,  ^  P   O 


»  P  C5  C3  c:; 


S2sliillliiiss5gse§ggiii|: 

CCGC  mC=  c3  w  m  m  c8  c3  cStcec;  mG  e3  m  m  m  c3  c3  c3c: 


c8  C3  c5tCC 


2 

o 
■a 


{3   ;  3 

o  Jo 


■  rt-^  «_•  rt_;  rt^  a^-  ra^  rt-  ^gggjf 
:o.2oMoCicSoWoCioBSo'rt^j'a 


-   6   -     S5°S 


720 

Upon  this  basis  the  maximum  rate  of  compensation  for 
the  carriage  of  the  mails  would  not  exceed  $45,170,643 
per  annum  and  the  minimum  rate  would  not  exceed 
$21,836,497  per  annum. 

Again  these  amounts  would  be  subject  to  a  reasonable 
reduction  on  account  of  the  considerations  hereinbefore 
stated. 

The  Railro.vds'  Estimate  Does  Not  Produce  a  Fair 
AND  Reasonable  Rate. 

Before  considering  the  results  of  the  Railroads'  estimate 
of  what  they  should  receive  for  carrying  the  mails,  atten- 
tion is  invited  to  the  following: 

The  evidence  submitted  by  the  Railroads  as  to  financial 
and  economic  conditions  subsequent  to  the  statistical 
period  should  not  be  taken  into  consideration  in  this 
hearing.  All  of  the  statistics  which  were  secured  by  the 
Department  and  the  Railroads  were  secured  with  reference 
to  a  selected  statistical  period.  All  conclusions  should, 
therefore,  be  based  upon  the  showing  so  made.  The 
Department  entered  its  objections  at  the  time  to  the  sub- 
mission and  consideration  of  such  matters  arising  subse- 
quent to  the  statistical  period.  The  situation  as  shown 
by  the  Railroads  in  their  exhibits  covering  conditions 
subsequent  to  said  period  is  abnormal  and  was  so  stated 
to  be,  by  the  Railroads'  witness,  Mr.  Wettling.  (Abstract 
of  Evidence,  p.  462,  supra.) 

inferences   drawn   from   certain    railroad    exhibits 

UNSOUND. 

For  the  purpose  of  laying  the  foundation  for  submitting 
their  claim  for  increased  compensation  the  Railroads 
introduced  certain  exhibits  with  the  evident  object  of 
suggesting  an  inadequacy  of  the  present  compensation 
received. 

Any  inferences  intended  to  be  drawn  from  the  exhibits 
to  the  effect  that  the  compensation  in  the  past  has  been 
inadecjuate,  or  that  it  is  at  present  inadequate,  are  unsound. 


721 


Kailroad  Exhibit  No.  47  does  not  show  operating  ratio 
for  passenger  service   nor   does  it  show  ratios   between 
revenue  and  expenses  for  any  service  mentioned,  including 
mail.     It  does  not  show  that  the  mails  participated  in  the 
same    degree    as    passenger   in    any   increased    expenses. 
For  these  reasons  no  deductions  can  be  drawn  from  this 
exhibit  with  respect  to  the  adequacy  or  inadequacy  of  mail 
compensation.     (Abstractof  Evidence,  pp.  4 10-412,  .u;;m.) 
P    .'^«°      T.  ^'^'^'^   ^^«-    ^8   slio^vs   expenditures   of   the 
Fost  Ofiice  Department  for  the  transportation  of  the  mails 
and  for  other  postal  functions.     The  inference  apparently 
sought  to  be  drawn  from   the  exhibit  is    that   the   ex- 
penditures   for    the    transportation    of    the    mail    should 
increase  m  the  same  ratio  as  expenditures  for  other  postal 
functions.     It  is  evident  upon  even  a  casual  consideration 
of  the  matter  that  no  such  inference  can  be  drawn.    Witness 
Worthington  for  the  Railroads, who  introduced  and  explained 
the  exhibit   admitted  that  this  was  correct.     (Abstract  of 
Evidence-Inferences  Drawn,  etc.,  pp.  412-415,  supra.) 

Railroad  Exhibit  No.  48  shows  increases  in  postal 
revenues  over  a  period  of  years  and  the  ratio  of  expendi- 
ture for  the  transportation  of  the  mails. 

The  evident  purpose  of  the  exhibit  is  to  suggest  the 
inference  that  the  postal  requirements  for  the  transporta- 
tion of  the  maUs  increase  in  the  ratio  of  the  increase  in 
postal  revenues.  There  is,  of  course,  no  basis  for  such  a 
conclusion.  (Abstract  of  Evidence-Inferences  Drawn 
etc.,  pp.  416-420,  supra,)  ' 

Railroad  Exhibit  No.  49  shows  the  trend  of  postal 
receipts  and  expenditures  and  percentage  of  total  postal 
receipts  paid  to  raUroads,  in  connection  with  which 
Witness  Worthington  for  the  RaHroads  quoted  the  Yv^olcott 
Commission  to  the  effect  that  rates  for  the  transportation 
of  the  mail  at  that  time  were  not  excessive. 

The  inference  evidently  intended  to  be  drawn  from  this 
was  that  if  the  Yv^olcott  Commission  found  the  rates  not 
excessive  in  1880,  they  have  remained  and  still  are  not 
excessive  at  the  present  time.  If  the  Wolcott  Commis- 
sion s  finding  shall  be  considered  at  all,  then  it  should  have 
been  supplemented  by  the  finding  of  the  Penrose-0  vers  tree  t 

i;:2G98— 10 46 


Commission  made  17  years  later,  recoji..ncnding  certain 
reductions  in  railroad  mail  pay  on  the  ground  tliat  some 
of  the  rates  of  pay  at  that  time  were  too  high,  and  upon 
which  Congress  acted  in  passing  the  statute  of  1907,  reduc- 
ing railroad  mail  pay.  (Abstract  of  Evidence — Inferences 
Drawn,  etc.,  pp.  420-423,  supra.) 

The  Railroads  submitted  certain  testimony  and  ex- 
hibits designed  to  show  rates  for  the  transportation  of 
merchandise-freight  and  express  matter.  These  statistics 
of  revenue  and  their  comparison  with  revenues  for  mails 
and  express  do  not  represent  usual  or  average  conditions 
of  service.  No  conclusions  were  drawn  by  the  Railroads' 
witnesses  with  respect  to  the  comparisons  between  revenue 
from  merchandise-freight  and  mails.  The  Department 
submits  that  these  rates  of  revenue  and  the  services  they 
represent  are  not  comparable  with  the  mail  service  in  any 
respect.     (Abstract  of  Evidence,  pp.  563-573,  supra.) 

ERRORS     OF     THEORY     AND     METHOD     OF     CALCULATION     IN 
RAILROAD    EXHIBITS. 

We  are  now  prepared  to  make  an  examination  of  the 
Railroads'  estimate  of  the  amount  they  should  receive  for 
the  carriage  of  the  mails.  Tnis  estimate  and  certain 
assumptions  upon  which  it  is  based  are  set  forth  in  Rail- 
road Exhibits  Nos.  3,  4,  and  6,  which  contain  material 
faults  both  in  theory  and  method  of  computation. 

(«)  An  examination  of  Railroad  Exhibit  No.  3,  indicates 
that  the  proposed  mail  pay  per  annum  of  $97,796,749  is 
grossly  excessive,  due  to  errors  both  in  theory  and  method 
of  calculation. 

The  theory  of  this  ascertainment  provides  for  an 
annual  rate  based  upon  29.29  cents  (the  Railroads'  aver- 
age passenger  train  revenue  per  car-mile),  applied  to 
333,891,255.34  car-miles.  The  latter  figure  is  derived  by 
adding  to  the  252,195,308.70  equated  car-miles  of  service 
authorized,  given  in  Post  Office  Department  Ex- 
hibit No.  51,  an  amount  representing  0.91  per  cent  thereof 
(2,294,977.31  car-miles)  for  emergency  service  performed 
and  increasing  the  sum  thereof  by  31.2  per  cent.     Upon 


723 

this  theory  every  car-mile  authorized  for  mail  service, 
whether  for  regularly  authorized  or  for  emergency  srace, 
is  weighted  with  excess  or  empty  space  of  31.2  per  cent 
(Railroad  Exhibit  No.  3). 

This  excessive  charge  of  31.2  per  cent  is  analyzed  in 
Eailroad  Exhibit  No.  6,  the  figures  there  anreaiing  for  30 
days.  The  excessive  charge  is  shown  as  follows,  in  con- 
nection with  the  designations  used  by  the  railroads  in  that 
exhibit: 

Total  authorized,  18,507,542  car-miles  (column  12),  ex- 
cess charged  701,937  (difference  between  column  12  and 
column  23). 

Total  excess  over  authorized,  1,332,828  car-miles  (column 
12,  also  column  23). 

Total  unauthorized,  2,303,937  car-miles  (column  23). 

Total  uimsed,  1,432,142  car-miles  (column  12,  also 
column  23). 

Total,  5,770.844  car-miles. 

With  reference  to  the  overcharge  for  "total  unauthor- 
ized," it  will  be  noted  that  the  excess  charge  is  made  not- 
withstanding the  fact  that  the  base  upon  which  it  is  com- 
puted does  not  even  represent  space  either  authorized  for 
or  occu]  ied  by  mails. 

This  excessive  charge  is  distributed  by  the  railroads  to 
the  several  classes  of  units  of  service  authorizations  as 
follows : 

Empty  car-miles  for  railway  post-office  cars,  277,953  ad- 
ditional to  6,554,602  car-miles  authorized,  or  4.24  per  cent 
increase.  Empty  car-miles  for  full  storao;e  cars,  178,206 
additional  to  3,762,335  car-miles  authorized,  or  4.74  per 
cent  increase.  Empty  car-miles  for  mail-apartment  cars, 
2,910,938  additional  to  6,700,537  car-miles  authorized,  or 
43.44  per  cent  increase.  Empty  car-miles  for  storage 
units  in  mixed  cars,  1,563,737  additional  to  878.099  car- 
miles  authorized  or  178.08  per  cent  increase.  Empty  car- 
miles  for  closed-pouch  units,  840,010  additional  to  611,969 
car-miles  authorized  or  137.26  per  cent  increase.  By  ref- 
erence to  column  15  of  Railroad  Evhibit  No.  6  it  is  seen 
that  the  additional  charge  of  527,838  car-miles  unoccupied 
space  is  apportioned  to  storage  units  in  mixed  cars  and 


T24 

closed-pouch  service  onl}',  so  that  the  excessive  charge  to 
these  classes  of  service  is  in  a  measure  accounted  for. 
That  these  classes  of  mail  service  are  overcharged  with  un- 
occupied, excess  and  unauthorized  space  is  amply  shown 
by  Post  Office  Department  Exhibits  Nos.  83  to  88,  inclu- 
sive, where  specific  examples  are  given.  This  included 
space  in  cars  which  carried  no  mails.  On  the  other  hand, 
the  distribution  of  the  mioccupied  space  tabulated  in 
column  15,  Railroad  Exhibit  No.  6,  was  excessive  in  the 
case  of  the  mails  and  too  low  in  the  case  of  the  passenger 
and  express  because  of  the  theory  that  baggage,  miscel- 
laneous and  express  services  required  no  excess  or  return 
empty  space,  such  as  was  charged  to  mails,  which  space 
was  included  in  the  mail  car  foot-miles,  forming  the  basis 
for  apportioning  the  unoccupied  space.  The  amount  of 
the  empty  space  thus  charged  to  mails  is  not  known,  but 
that  it  was  an  improper  charge  is  shown  by  the  testimony. 

The  application  of  the  31.2  per  cent,  by  which  the  re- 
sulting mail  pay  on  Railroad  Exhibit  No.  3  is  produced, 
is  also  faulty,  as  the  space  statistics,  from  which  this  per 
cent  is  secured,  cover  140  first-class  carriers  only,  while 
the  application  is  to  the  whole  mail  service. 

This  fault  is  clearly  shown  by  dividing  the  railroads' 
estimated  car-miles  for  mails  (333,891,255.34)  given  on 
this  exhibit,  by  .091382  estimated  by  the  railroads  as  the 
ratio  of  mail  space  to  the  passenger  train  space.  This  pro- 
duces a  result  of  3,653,796,754  car-miks  for  total  passenger 
train  service.  Tnis  exceeds  the  total  passenger  train  car- 
miks  reported  to  the  commission  for  the  calendar  year 
1916  by  over  85,000,000  car-miks. 

That  the  Railroads  proposed  mail  pay  per  annum  of  over 
$97,000,000  is  grossly  excessive  is  further  shown  by  the 
application  of  their  method  to  all  the  services  performed 
in  passenger  trains,  which  application  must  necessarily  fol- 
low if  their  conclusion  with  respect  to  the  mails  be  correct. 
This  is  made  evident  from  the  following  facts: 

There  were  approximately  3,567,000,000  passenger  train 
car-miks  operated  in  the  calendar  year  1917  which,  at  the 
rate  of  29.29  cents  per  car-mile,  produces  a  passenger  train 
revenue   of   $1,044,744,300.     By   applying   the   railroads' 


ratios  of  space  to  these  total  car-miles  and  the  revenue 
29.29  cents  to  the  car-miles  for  the  several  services,  we 
reach  the  following  result: 


Revenue 

rate  per 
car-mile. 


Estimated 
revenue. 


Passens:er.. 

Express 

Mail 

Total 


13! 8710 
9.13b2 


2,746,2fil,836 
494,778,570 


Cents. 
29.29 
29.29 
29.29 


$804,3F0,093 
144,920,043 
95,473,564 


3,567,000,000 


29.29 


But  the  express  revenue  for  the  calendar  year  1917  will 
not  exceed  $109,000,000,  which,  divided  by  the  car-miles 
for  express  shown  in  the  above  table,  produces  a  car-mile 
rate  of  22.03  cents.  This  rate  practically  agrees  with  the 
revenue  rate  per  car-mile  received  by  the  railroac's  from 
express  given  in  Railroad  Exhibit  No.  6,  column  24,  as 
22.1  cents  per  car-mile.  It  is  evident  that  the  railroads' 
figure  for  mail  car-miles  of  333,891,255.34  is  excessive, 
and  that  the  use  of  29.29  cents  as  a  revenue  rate  per  car- 
mile  for  mail  service  is  beyond  the  limits  of  a  reasonable 
rate  as  shown  by  its  application  to  the  express  car-miles 
tabulated  on  the  railroad  exhibits. 

Again,  if  the  return  empty  movement  of  express  space 
had  been  reported  and  included  in  the  tabulations  by  the 
railroac's,  which  the  record  in  this  case  shows  was  not  done, 
the  car-miles  for  express  would  be  increased.  This  would 
produce  even  a  lower  rate  per  car-mile  for  express  than  22 
cents,  and  at  the  same  time  decrease  the  mail  car-miles 
and  show  a  higher  rate  for  mail  s?rvice  than  the  17.8  cents 
given  in  column  24  on  Railroad  Exhibit  No.  6.  It  would 
likewise  decrease  the  estimated  mail  revenue  based  on  a 
given  rate  per  car-mile.  There  has  been  no  testimony  in 
this  cas3  showing  such  a  disparity  between  express  and 
mail  services  performed  by  the  railroads  as  would  warrant 
an  increas-^  of  pay  for  the  latter  service  to  38.4  cents  per 
car-mile  (Railroad  Exhibit  No.  3),  an  advance  of  73.7  per 
cent  over  the  revenue  received  by  the  railroads  from 
express,  shown  by  the  railroads'  statistics  to  be  only  22.1 
cents. 


72C 

(l)  In  Railroad  Exhibit  No.  3  there  are  shown  the  rev- 
enues for  the  several  clr.ss;  s  of  service,  passenger,  express, 
and  mail,  compr.sing  passe  ngcr  train  operating  revenue,  for 
the  month  of  April,  1917.  The  total  there  shown  is  com- 
pos3d  of  the  revenue  s  reported  by  the  carriers  (included  in 
the  exhibit)  for  primary  accounts  Ncs.  102  to  109,  inclu- 
sive, and  does  not  include  any  items  of  "incidental"  rev- 
enue. So  far  as  noted  the  "incidental"  or  miscellaneous 
operating  revenues  are  nowhere  shown  in  the  railroad  ex- 
hibits. They  are  included,  however,  in  the  Pest  Office 
Department  Exhibit  No.  74  for  CLnss  I  carriers,  as  well  as 
in  Post  Office  Department  Exhibits  Ncs.  66  and  67. 

Attention  is  called  to  the  om'ssion  of  "incidental"  reve- 
nue from  the  railroad  exhibits  for  the  reason  that  Railroad 
Exhibit  No.  4  based  upon  cost  factors  gives  a  lower 
estimate  for  mail  service  than  that  shown  on  Railroad 
Exhibit  No,  3  based  on  passenger  train  revenue,  and  in 
the  cost  estimate  there  have  been  included  the  expenses 
for  miscellaneous  operations  incidental  to  passonger  train 
operation,  in  which  the  mail  is  erroneously  made  to  share. 

The  operating  expenses  shown  on  Railroad  Exhibit  No.  3 
arc  stated  to  be  for  the  passenger  train,  but  the  total 
amount  of  $52,331,480.74  there  shown  includes  all  ex- 
penses chargeable  to  passenger  traffic  according  to  Letter 
of  Instruction  No.  504,  and  is  comparable  with  the  same 
item  on  Post  Office  Department  Exhibits  Nos.  67  and  74, 
showing  the  total  to  be  $52,293,015.71.  This  total  pas- 
senger operating  expense  is  stated  as  26.58  per  cent  of  the 
total  operating  expenses,  and  therefore  the  use  of  this 
ratio  to  determine  a  passenger  service  charge  will  also 
include  the  expenses  for  miscellaneous  or  "incidental" 
operations,  the  revenues  for  which  are  not  shown  in  railroad 
exhibits. 

As  these  costs  for  miscellaneous  and  incidental  operations 
arc  wholly  passenger  in  character  (dining  and  buffet  serv- 
ice, hotels  and  restaurants,  and  other  like  expenses  for 
parcel  rooms,  storage  of  baggage,  etc.),  the  use  of  the  26.58 
per  cent  in  the  manner  shown  on  Railroad  Exhibit  No.  4 
m-ak(;3  no  allowance  for  such  exclusive  passenger  charges, 
and  the  passenger  train  investment  given  as  $4,854,671,879 


727 

is  excessive  for  this  reason  as  well  as  for  the  reason  that  it 
includes  pro]ierty  values  for  railroads  not  engaged  in  car- 
riage of  mails.  The  amount,  Witness  Wettling  stated, 
could  not  be  given  with  accuracy. 

(c)  Tlie  Railroads  rejected  the  very  complete  tabulations 
of  property  investment  reported  by  themselves  and  substi- 
tuted therefor  the  apportionment  to  mail  of  a  property 
investment  based  on  their  car-foot  m.ile  ratio  of  9.1382  per 
cent,  as  representing  the  use  of  the  property  devoted  to 
mail  service.     The}^  also  rejected  the  ratios  of  relative  cost. 

Tiie  use  of  the  ratio  of  space  operated  in  tlie  trains  as 
charged  to  the  mails  on  Raih-oad  Exhibit  No.  4,  and  thic  use 
of  the  estimated  mail  car  miles  based  on  the  same  ratio  (in- 
cluding as  it  does  the  31.2  per  cent  of  empty  space  herein- 
before shown  to  be  excessive),  in  itse.'f  produces  results  not 
warranted  by  the  facts.  But  the  use  of  anj"  ratio  in  this 
manner  sets  aside  ail  direct  and  known  costs  reported  by 
tlie  carriers  and  substitutes  therefor  a  space  ratio  secured 
from  train  and  space  operation  having  no  direct  relation 
to  a  large  proportion  of  values  of  pro]>erty  and  cost  of 
maintenance.  By  reference  to  Railroad  Exhibit  No.  3, 
it  is  found  that  the  passenger  train  operating  expenses  for 
mail  are  S4,330,999.40,  or  8.276  per  cent  of  the  total  pas- 
senger train  operating  expenses.  If  this  per  cent  of  cost 
had  been  used,  thus  recognizing  the  directly  allocated 
charges,  the  property  investment  for  mails  would  have 
been  reduced  by  S41,856,981,  or  nearly  10  per  cent.  Also, 
the  use  of  this  lower  ratio  does  not  take  into  account  the 
directly  allocated  property  investment  chargeable  to  pas- 
senger service  proper,  such  as  passenger,  baggage,  dining, 
and  other  service  exclusively  passenger  in  character. 

The  use  of  a  7  per  cent  return  on  investment  is  not  sup- 
ported by  any  evidence  except  the  opinion  of  the  railroad 
witness;  and  on  the  contrary  the  Post  Office  Department 
Exhibits  indicate  that  less  than  6  per  cent  was  actually 
received  for  all  activities. 

(d)  To  sum  up  the  various  overcharges  to  mail  service 
caused  by  the  erroneous  theories  and  methods  of  calcula- 
tion used  to  produce  the  results  given  on  Railroad  Ex- 
hibits Nos.  3,  4,  and  6: 


7Q.S 

1.  Tho  railroads'  theory  of  ascertainment  of  an  annual 
rate  is  based  upon  mail-service  mileage  improperly  in- 
creased bj'-  31.2  per  cent,  representing  the  excessive 
unauthorized  and  unused  space  and  operation  charged 
to  t'^e  mails  by  the  railroads,  as  specifically  referred  to 
hereinbefore. 

2.  Tiieir  estimated  car-miles  for  mails  is  excessive  in 
number,  as  being  9.1.'iS2  per  cent  (their  estimated  space 
ratio  for  the  mails)  of  a  total  number  of  car-mi^es  for  all 
passenger  service  greatly  in  excess  of  the  actual  number 
of  such  car-miles  performed  during  the  calendar  year. 

3.  Their  theory  of  ascertainment  of  an  annual  rate  is 
based  further  upon  the  application  of  29.29  cents  per  car- 
mile,  that  being  their  "average  passenger  train  revenue, 
instead  of  being  based  upon  cost  and  a  fair  return. 

4.  Their  proposed  mail  pay  rate  per  car-mile  for  author- 
ized service  was  increased  to  38.4  cents  (Railroad  Exhibit 
No.  3)  or  73.7  per  cent  above  the  express  car-mile  rate 
shown  on  Railroad  Exhibit  No.  6,  although  no  correspond- 
ing increase  in  cost  of  operation  was  shown. 

5.  Their  mail  pay  estimate  based  on  cost  is  increased  by 
the  amount  of  the  participation  by  mail  in  expenses  for 
miscellaneous  operations,  such  as  dining  and  buffet  service, 
hotels  and  restaurants,  etc.,  which  are  exclusively  pas- 
senger in  character  and  the  expenses  for  which  were 
directly  allocated  to  passenger  on  the  reports  of  the  carriers. 

6.  The  estimated  property  investment  for  mail  is 
increased  cumulatively  by  the  five  following  methods  of 
ascertainment: 

(a)  The  total  property  investment  as  of  December  31, 
1917,  includes  property  for  certain  freight  roads  and  others 
which  carry  no  mail. 

{h)  The  total  property  investment  apportioned  to  pas- 
senger service  as  a  whole  includes  property  directly  allo- 
cated to  freight  service  by  the  carriers'  reports,  and  the 
property  investment  ascribed  to  mail  is  increased,  by  this 
means,  to  include  a  share  of  freight  property  investment. 

(c)  The  property  investment  apportioned  to  mail  service 
is  made  to  include  a  share  in  property  reported  by  the 
carriers  as  exclusively  passenger  and  directly  allocated 
thereto. 


729 

(d)  The  use  of  26.58  per  cent  in  the  apportionment  to 
passenger  of  the  property  investment  increases  the  total 
passenger  property  investment  by  26.58  per  cent  of  any 
freight  property  investments  included,  plus  the  total  of  all 
directly  allocated  charges  covering  property  devoted  to 
miscellaneous  passenger  operations  "incidental"  to  pas- 
senger service  only.  This  added  passenger  property  in- 
vestment is  in  turn  participated  in  by  mail  property  invest- 
ment. 

(e)  The  use  of  9.1382  per  cent  in  apportionment  to 
mail  of  the  property  investment  increases  the  total  mail 
property  investment  by  9.1382  per  cent  of  the  miscel- 
laneous property  values  described  as  "incidental"  to  pas- 
senger and  directly  allocated  thereto  by  the  carriers. 
And  in  addition  the  use  of  that  per  cent  covers  into  mail 
property  investment  9.1382  per  cent  of  the  directly  allocated 
portion  of  passenger  property  reported  as  directly  allocated 
by  the  carriers. 

7.  Seven  per  cent,  used  as  the  rate  of  return  on  mail 
property  investment  is  excessive. 

(e)  Tne  excessive  amount  claimed  in  the  Railroads'  Ex- 
hibits Nos.  3,  4,  and  6  as  a  fair  and  reasonable  rate  for  the 
transportation  of  the  mails  as  discussed  hereinbefore,  is 
further  shown  to  be  unfair  and  unreasonable,  by  the  applica- 
tion to  the  express  service  of  the  same  process  of  rate-build- 
ing applied  by  the  Railroads  to  their  proposed  mail  rate. 
By  applying  this  same  process,  on  the  assumption  of  the 
same  proportion  of  excess  space  in  the  express  service 
(which  assumption  is  amply  justified  by  the  evidence 
recited  hereinbefore),  the  necessary  annual  rate  of  com- 
pensation for  the  carriage  of  express  by  the  Railroads 
would  amount  to  $163,413,461.  Tne  express  revenue 
received  for  the  year  was  only  about  $106,000,000.  Wncn 
reminded  of  the  fact  that,  in  the  recent  hearing  before 
the  Interstate  Commerce  Commission  upon  the  request 
of  the  express  companies  to  increase  their  rates  5  per 
cent,  no  showing  was  made  by  the  Railroads  that  they 
were  carrying  express  at  a  loss,  no  satisfactory  explana- 
tion was  given  by  the  Railroads'  witness.  Furthermore 
when  the  suggestion  was  made  that  if  the  Railroads  are 


730 

losing  so  heavily  on  the  carriage  of  express  they  could 
and  should  revise  their  voluntary  contracts  with  the 
express  companies  by  which  some  part  of  this  great  loss 
could  be  recovered,  no  satisfactory  statement  was  made 
by  the  Railroads'  witness. 

Tais  logical  result  of  the  application  of  the  Railroads' 
method  to  the  question  of  adequate  compensation  for 
carrying  express  shows  conclusively  its  utisoimdness  as 
applied  to  the  carriage  of  the  mails.  (Abstract  of  Evidence, 
pp.  574-579,  supra.) 

THE  SHORT  LINES. 

T.ie  Short  Line  Railroads,  so  called,  submitted  some 
testimony  designed  to  show  that  they  are  entitled  to  a 
differential  producing  a  higher  rate  for  the  service  of 
carrying  the  mails  than  shall  be  fixed  for  the  other 
railroads. 

Tne  record  shows  that  the  testimony  was  subm.itted 
upon  behalf  of  these  roads  which  are  commonly  termed 
"Short  Lines,"  and  which  are  independently  owned  and 
operated,  and  not  controlled  by  the  larger  roads  or 
systems. 

Tiiey  were  not  successful  in  satisfactorily  establishing 
their  right  as  a  class,  to  a  differential.  Tne  testimony, 
however,  shows  that  if  there  shall  be  a  different  rate 
applicable  to  this  class,  it  might  be  based  upon  the  dif- 
ference between  freight  and  passenger  rates  received  by 
such  roads  and  such  rates  received  by  the  trunk  lines. 
It  was  further  shown  by  the  evidence  that  a  rate  based 
upon  cost  of  service  plus  a  reasonable  return  would  be 
an  ideal  rate.  (Abstract  of  Evidence — Tne  Short  Lines, 
pp.  581-592,  supra.) 

Tiie  Department  secured  from  the  records  of  the  Inter- 
state Commerce  Commission  a  list  of  railroad  mail  car- 
riers which  fall  within  the  definition  of  short  lines,  as 
stated  in  the  testimony  referred  to  above.  Tne  list  of 
such  railroad  mail  carriers  as  were  found  to  have  been 
embraced  in  the  recapitulations  of  railroads  on  forms 
R.  M.  P.  Nos.  70  and  71,  and  which  rendered  reports  on 
forms  R.  M.  P.  Nos.  1  to  4  and  Nos.  50  to  55,  inclusive. 


731 

in  such  a  manner  as  to  permit  the  use  of  the  entire  sta- 
tistics, is  shown  on  sheet  filed  in  this  case  since  the  hear- 
ings ended,  and  entitled,  "List  of  railroad  mail  carriers 
embraced  in  recapitulations  of  short  line  railroads  on 
forms  R.  M.  P.  Nos.  70  and  71.  The  companies  included 
are  those  independently  owned  and  operated  which 
rendered  reports  on  forms  R.  M.  P.  Nos.  1  to  4  and  Nos. 
50  to  55,  inclusive,  in  such  a  manner  as  to  permit  the  use 
of  the  entire  statistics." 

Tne  financial  data  for  these  roads  compiled  on  forms 
R.  M.  P.  Nos.  70  and  71  were  recapitulated  on  final  sheets, 
and  a  final  sheet  also  comparing  the  recapitulation  of 
form  R.  M.  P.  No.  71  with  "Investment  in  road  and  equip- 
ment," were  filed  with  the  Commission  with  said  list  of 
railroad  mail  carriers. 

Tne  recapitulation  of  form  R.  M.  P.  No.  71  shows  the 
followinsc  results: 


Service. 

Operating 
revenues 

per 
car-mile. 

Operating 
expenses 
and  other 
expendi- 
tnrr  s  Per 
car- mile. 

\et  incmo 

per 
car-mile. 

Cen's. 
2X9\ 
19.75 
30. 52 

Cents. 
3\95 
2S.71 
30.04 

Cents. 
13.04 

18.96 

Mail .                                                        

.48 

1  Deficiency. 

It  appears  from  these  facts  that  upon  this  basis  of  esti- 
mate these  Short  Lines  are  operating  the  passenger  service 
and  the  express  service  at  a  loss,  but  are  operating  the  mail 
service  at  a  gain,  although  a  small  one.  The  net  revenue 
shown  on  Post  Office  Department  Exhibit  No.  66  for  aU 
the  lines  is  3.06  cents  per  car-mile,  while  for  the  Short  Lines 
so  tabulated  it  appears  to  be  0.48  cent  per  car-mile. 

The  comparison  of  recapitulation  of  Form  R.  M.  P.  No.  71 
with  "Investment  in  road  and  property"  appearing  on  one 
of  the  three  sheets  above  named  shows  no  per  cent  of  net 
income  to  railway  investment  for  passenger  and  express, 
but  does  show  a  small  per  cent  for  the  maUs,  being  one- 
hundredth  of  1  per  cent  for  the  month,  or  twelve-hun- 
dredths  of  1  per  cent  for  the  year. 


It  would  appear  from  these  facts  that  if  there  is  to  be  a 
difference  made  in  a  general  rate  applicable  to  these  so- 
called  "Short  Lines,"  such  difference  might  bo  repre- 
sented by  an  increase  in  the  rate  sufficient  to  produce  the 
same  net  income  per  car-mile  as  above  allowed  the  other 
lines.  Furthermore,  this  would  not  only  meet  the  require- 
ments apphed  to  the  rates  generally,  but  would  satisfy 
the  view  expressed  in  the  testimony  that  an  ideal  rate 
would  be  one  based  upon  cost  and  a  fair  return. 

CONCLUSION. 

It  is  respectfully  submitted: 

That  the  space-basis  system  for  ascertaining  the  rate  or 
compensation  for  the  transportation  of  the  mails  by  rail- 
way common  carriers  and  the  service  connected  therewith 
shaU  be  prescribed  by  the  Commission. 

That  the  proposed  plan  of  the  Post  Office  Department, 
submitted  in  this  case,  shall  be  authorized  as  the  basis  for 
such  space-basis  system. 

That  the  fair  and  reasonable  rate  or  compensation  for 
such  transportation  and  service,  on  the  basis  of  estimated 
cost  and  fair  return  shall  not  exceed  $54,415,778.96  per 
annum  on  the  basis  of  the  authorizations  of  service  as  of 
March  27,  1917,  or  21.5  cents,  or  pro  ratio  thereof,  a  car- 
mile  of  service  for  any  unit  of  space. 

That  the  fair  and  reasonable  rate  or  compensation  for 
such  transportation  and  service,  on  the  basis  of  the  ton- 
mile-revenue  received  by  the  Railroads  for  carrying  ex- 
press, and  equated  on  the  basis  of  comparative  cost  of  per- 
forming service — mail  and  express — is  as  shown  herein- 
before (p.  719);  the  maximum  not  exceeding  $45,170,643 
per  annum,  and  the  minimum  not  exceeding  $21,836,497 
per  annum. 

That  the  relations  existing  between  the  Railroads  as  public 
service  corporations  and  the  Government,  and  the  nature 
of  such  service  as  distinguished  from  the  ordinary  transpor- 
tation business  of  the  Railroads,  justifies  a  lower  rate  for  the 
carriage  of  the  mails  and  the  service  connected  therewith 


733 

than  should  apply  to  other  or  ordinary  transportation 
business ;  and  that  any  rates  fixed  upon  on  the  above-named 
bases  should  be  reduced  accordingly. 

That  with  respect  to  the   so-called    Short   Lines,  any 
difference  in  rate  should  bo  represented  by  an  increase 
sufficient  to  produce  the  same  net  income  per  car-mile  as 
shall  be  allowed  the  other  lines. 
Respectfully  submitted. 

Joseph  Stewart, 
Special  Assistant  to  the  Attorney  General. 

(For  the  Postmaster  General.) 


APPENDIXES. 


Appendix  A. 

MINORITY  REPORT  OF  THE  SPECIAL  COMMISSION  ON 
RAILWAY  MAIL  TRANSPORTATION,  SIGNED  GARDINER 
G.  HUBBARD,  APRIL  1,  1878.  (S.  M.sc.  Doc.  No.  14,  45th 
Cong.,  1st  Sess.) 

History  of  Railway  Mail  Service. 

Before  railroads  were  established  the  Postmaster  Gen- 
eral ad-\"ertised  for  proposals  for  carrying  the  mail  by  stage- 
coach, and  contracted  with  the  lowest  bidder.  The  con- 
tractor was  required  to  start  and  arrive  at  the  time  fixed 
by  the  Postmaster  General,  and  to  carry  the  mail  between 
the  post  offices  at  the  termini  of  the  route  and  to  e^ery 
intermediate  office. 

On  railroad  routes  competition  was  impossible,  and  Con- 
gress therefore,  by  act  of  July  7,  1838,  provided  "  that  e^"ery 
railroad  shall  be  a  post  route,  and  the  Postmaster  General 
shall  cause  the  mail  to  be  transported  thereon,  proA  ided 
he  can  have  it  done  on  reasonable  terms,  and  not  paying 
therefor,  in  any  instance,  more  than  25  per  cent  o\  er  and 
above  what  similar  transportation  would  cost  in  post 
coaches."  The  act  of  January  25,  1839,  limited  the  amount 
and  provided  that  the  Postmaster  General  should  not 
"allow  more  than  $300  per  mile  per  annum  to  any  railroad 
for  the  conveyance  of  one  or  more  daily  mails  upon  the 
road."  Under  these  acts  different  rates  were  paid,  and 
great  latitude  was  exercised  by  the  Dej^artment  in  deter- 
mining what  "similar  transportation"  was.  The  compen- 
sation was  based  on  the  supposition  that  railway  ser%'ice 
was  more  expensi^'e  than  stage  coach,  but  as  it  was  really 
less,  the  prohts  of  the  railroads  were  very  great.  In  1845, 
the  railroad  routes  were  divided  into  three  classes,  accord- 
ing "to  the  size  of  the  mails,  the  speed  with  which  they 
are  comeyed,  and  the  importance  of  the  serA'ice";  and  it 
was  proA'ided  that  the  Postmaster  General,  "for  the  con- 
veyance of  the  mail  on  any  raih'oad  of  the  first  class,  shall 
not  pay  a  higher  rate  of  com])ensation  than  is  now  allowed 
by  law;  nor  for  the  second  class  more  than  SI 00  per  mile 
per  annum ;  nor  for  any  railroad  of  the  third  class  more 
(735) 


73G 

than  850  j)er  mile  por  annum;"  but  "if  one-half  of  the 
service  was  performed  in  the  night,  25  per  cent  more  could 
be  paid."  The  results  of  this  law  are  stated  in  the  report 
of  the  Postmaster  General  for  1848,  in  the  following?  words: 
"The  o])erations  of  three  years  show  that  the  mail  service 
has  been  augmented  15  per  cent  and  its  cost  diminished 
at  the  same  time  15.7  per  cent."  The  roads  were  at  this 
time,  probably,  all  overpaid,  but  by  degrees,  as  the  busi- 
ness and  the  weight  of  the  mails  increased,  the  compensa- 
tion on  the  main  routes  became  insufficient.  In  1864 
postal  cars  were  introduced  for  the  distribution  of  the 
letter  mail,  but  no  additional  compensation  was  granted. 
In  1866,  the  managers  of  the  trunk  lines  remonstrated, 
complaining  of  the  injustice  of  the  law  and  the  inadequacy 
of  their  compensation.  In  order  to  ascertain  the  grounds 
for  this  complahit,  the  Postmaster  General  ordered  the 
mails  on  all  the  roads  to  be  weighed  and  the  results  tabu- 
lated. The  tables  showed  great  inequalities;  on  4  roads, 
which  received  $300  a  mile,  the  average  daily  weight 
ranged  from  7,668  pounds  to  22,581;  on  15,  which  recei^•ed 
$200  a  mile,  the  range  was  from  367  pounds  to  19,183. 
It  appeared  that  in  1858  the  average  pay  to  railroads  for 
postal  service  was  $115.77  per  mile  per  annum;  in  1867, 
$112.08;  that  in  this  time  the  mails  had  increased  three- 
fold in  weight,  and  required  more  than  three  times  as  much 
space,  at  a  large  increase  of  cost  to  the  companies.  In 
view  of  these  facts,  Congress  passed  an  act  March  3,  1873 
(published  in  the  appendix  of  this  report),  for  a  readjust- 
ment of  pay  on  the  basis  of  weight  and  making  a  small 
allowance  for  space,  where  postal  cars  were  used.  The 
weighing  hi  the  fall  of  1873  showed  that  the  mails  con- 
tinued to  increase.  The  largest  daily  average  weight  in 
1867  was  23,825  pounds,  carried  251  miles;  m  1873, 
39,170  pounds,  carried  460  miles;  roads  carrying  16,000 
pounds  daily  and  furnishing  postal  cars  were  paid  $375 
a  year  a  mile,  and  those  carrying  more  than  twice  as  much 
no  more.  The  largest  daily  weight  carried  in  1877  was 
69,554  pounds;  one  road,  making  98  trips  per  week,  was 
paid  $839.30  per  mile  per  annum,  while  another  road, 
making  9  trips  per  week,  carried  15,596  pounds,  and  was 
paid  $885.62. 

Under  the  proA'ision  of  the  act  of  1873,  up  to  June  30, 
1875,  readjustments  were  made  on  650  routes  or  parts  of- 
routes,  making  an  increase  of  compensation  on  509  routes 
and  a  decrease  on  141,  the  net  result  showing  an  increase 
of  $1,663,018.16. 


737 

These  laws  make  weight  the  basis  of  compensation, 
although  space  had  become  the  basis  of  requirement; 
the  weight  of  the  mail  has  contuiually  mcreased  and  the 
department  has  constantl}'  demanded  more  space  and 
greater  facilities.  In  1862,  only  20  feet  a  day  in  a  baggage 
car  were  required  between  New  York  and  Philadelphia; 
in  1866,  100  feet;  and  in  1875,  three  postal  cars,  each  50 
feet  long;  and  in  1877,  650  feet.  In  1868,  on  the  Lake 
Shore  &  Michigan  Southern  Railroad,  13  feet  were  re- 
quh'ed,  and  in  1875  the  fast  mail,  with  four  postal  cars, 
and  one  postal  car  on  another  train.  The  act  of  1876 
reduced  the  compensation,  which  was  before  considered 
inadequate,  10  per  cent.  The  fast  and  limited  mails  were 
immediately  withdrawn,  and  other  important  mail  facilities, 
which  had  become  necessities,  were  withheld  by  some  of 
the  railway  companies. 

The  only  mcrease  per  mile  m  the  annual  compensation 
for  transporting  the  mails  from  1838  to  the  present  time 
was  the  addition  of  25  per  cent  in  1845,  for  service  per- 
formed m  the  night,  and  the  readjustment  of  1873,  by 
which  825  for  every  additional  2,000  pounds  was  added 
to  the  compensation  of  railroads  carrymg  over  5,000  pounds 
and  an  allowance  of  from  $25  to  $50  a  mile  for  postal  cars, 
according  to  then'  length.  Immediately  after  this  read- 
justment the  department  conmienced  the  distribution  of 
the  newspaper  mail  on  the  postal  cars,  and  this  required 
nearly  as  much  additional  space  as  that  used  for  the  dis- 
tribution of  letters,  but  without  additional  compensation. 
During  these  35  years  the  daily  average  weight  of  the  mail 
carried  from  New  York  increased  from  3,200  pounds  in 
1837  to  42,518  pounds  m  1873,  and  to  60,933  pounds  m 
1876,  and  the  space  required  on  the  roads  running  from 
New  York  west  and  south  increased  from  200  feet  in  1868 
to  1,000  feet  m  1877.     (p.  442.) 

Under  the  heading  "The  basis  of  compensation,"  the 
report  is  as  follows: 

Weight  is  the  proper  basis  for  charges  on  freight  trams, 
for  each  train  usually  carries  one  way  as  much  freight  and 
as  many  cars  as  the  engine  can  draw.  The  weight  of  the 
paying  and  dead  load  are  about  equal:  therefore,^  the  aver- 
age weight  carried  the  train-mile,  and  the  expi^nse  being 
ascertained,  the  charges  are  based  upon  weight.  Space 
is  the  proper  basis  for  charges  in  passenger  trains.  Every 
passenger  train  could  carry  twice  as  many  passengers  as 
there  are  seats,  and  nearly  five  times  the  average  actually 

122698—19 47 


738 

carried.  Tho  payiii.e;  load  has,  thorefore,  little  relation  to 
the  dead  wei.c:ht."  Therefore,  the  average  number  of  pas- 
sengers per  train-mile,  the  length  of  the  train,  and  the 
expense  being  ascertained,  the  charges  should  be  based 
upon  the  linear  feet  occupied.  If  the  mail  was  carried  m 
bulk,  it  would  be  necessary  to  ascertain  the  value  of  the 
space  occupied  by  a  given  weight  before  the  cost  of  carry- 
ing it  could  be  determined ;  but  when  space  is  required  for 
distributing  as  well  as  for  carrying  the  mail,  the  cost  can 
be  fairly  determined  only  by  reference  to  the  space  re- 
quired,    (p.  445.) 


Appendix  B. 

views  expressed  by  post  office  department 
officials,  congressional  and  departmental 
commissions,  and  railroad  officials,  favora- 
ble to  a  space-basis  system. 

Remarks  and  suggestions  respecting  the  compensation  for 
mail  service  on  railroad  routes,  by  J.  N.  Davis,  Post  Office 
Department. 

In  practice,  as  a  general  rule,  at  least  since  July  1,  1851, 
one  or  more  route  agents  have  been  appointed  to  accom- 
pany, receive,  and  distribute  the  mails  on  each  railroad 
route,  and  an  apartment  has  been  provided  and  fitted  up 
by  the  company  for  their  use,  varying  in  size,  say,  from 
one-eighth  to  one-half  the  length  of  a  baggage  or  passenger 
car.  So  that  the  distribution  of  mails  while  in  transit  on 
railroad  routes  is  not  new,  though  the  system  has  been 
•extended  within  a  few  years  past  to  matter  passing  over 
successive  links  in  long  mail  lines,  instead  of  being  confined 
as  before  to  mails  passing  between  points  less  widely 
separated,  with  no  local  distributing  post  office  intervening. 

To  extend  the  system  in  this  manner,  the  Department 
in  the  year  1864  notified  the  proprietors  of  railroad  routes 
composing  several  of  the  principal  mail  lines  of  the  country 
that  more  car  room  would  be  necessary  than  they  had 
previously  provided.  (Letters  to  the  Postmaster-General 
explaining  a  proposed  modification  of  the  law,  etc.  By 
James  N.  Davis.     G.  P.  O.,  1876,  p.  19.) 


Discussion  of  the  proper  metJiod  of  compensation  to  railroads 
for  the  transportation  of  mails,  by  George  S.  Bangs,  General 
Superintendent.     {Government  Printing  Office,  1875.) 

Speaking  regarding  the  difficulties  experienced  by  the 
Department  under  the  law  of  1873,  Mr.  Bangs  said: 

The  reason  that  while  the  present  law  apparently  gives 
the  Department  fullest  power  to  demand  these  accom- 
modations, the  railroads  can,  at  their  option,  refuse  thorn, 
is  that  there  is  no  diflerence  made  in  the  compensation 
of  these  roads  which  do  and  those  which  do  not  furnish 
(739) 


740 

them.  The  compensation  is  regulated  hy  weight  carried, 
and,  excepting  the  allowance  for  railway  post-office  cars, 
space  is  not  considered,  or  rather  it  does  not  become  a 
fixed  factor  in  the  adjustment  of  the  compensation.     (P.  4.) 

Again  regarding  frequency,  he  stated  as  follows: 

In  addition  to  the  accommodations  on  the  trains  for  the 
assorting  of  mails  in  transit  the  Department  often  wishes 
to  establish  exchanges  of  pouches  between  the  more  promi- 
nent offices  on  the  line  of  a  railroad,  or  beyond  its  terminus. 
Tliese  exchanges  are  of  the  utmost  importance  to  the 
public;  that  is,  while  the  smaller  and  less  important  towns 
can  be  easily  supplied  with  all  the  mails  they  demand  or 
are  entitled  to  by  the  route  agents,  the  larger  and  more 
important  offices  must  necessarily  have  the  more  frequent 
mail  supplies  that  their  importance  entitles  them  to. 
These  mails  do  not  make  any  perceptible  increase  in  the 
weights,  but  rather  divide  the  same  weight  between  a 
greater  number  of  trains,  increasing  the  work  performed 
by  the  railroad  without  increasing  their  compensation. 
For  these  reasons  the  road  either  refuses  the  use  of  the 
trains  for  these  mails,  or  only  allows  them  to  a  limited 
extent.  This  is  the  case  on  about  half  the  railroad  mileage 
in  the  whole  country.     (Pp.  4,  5.) 

Again  regarding  space,  he  pointed  out  the  fact  that  under 
the  law  of  1873  one  railroad  may  furnish  a  much  greater 
amount  of  car  facilities  in  space  and  otherwise  to  the 
Department  than  another  road  furnishes  and  receive  no 
greater  compensation  therefor,  and  states — 

Is  there  not,  then,  in  this  fact  alone,  sufficient  reason  to 
warrant  a  new  law  governing  the  compensation  upon  a 
different  basis  ? 

The  proper  basis  for  the  adjustment  of  the  pay  to  rail- 
roads would  be  to  base  it  upon  the  accommodations  and 
service  required  and  furnished;  that  is,  the  road  furnish- 
ing the  Department  the  most  ample  facilities  for  trans- 
mission and  handling  of  the  mails  should  be  compen- 
sated in  pro])ortion.     (P.  5.) 

Again,  regarding  the  weight  system,  he  stated  as  follows: 

A  great  objection  to  the  weight  system  is  its  cumbrous 
nature.  An  agent  of  the  railroad  must  accompany  each 
train  upon  which  mail  is  conveyed,  to  take  weights  as  the 
mails  are  received  and  delivered.  This  entails  great 
expense  to  the  railroad.  There  is  also  a  possibility  of 
fraud  in  these  weighings;  that  such  is  the  case  is  evidenced 
from  the  fart  that  certain  agents  have  negotiated  with 


741 

•different  railroads  to  take  charge  of  the  weighing  of  mails 
and  to  receive  compensation  therefor  upon  conditions  of 
an  increase  of  com])ensation  resulting  from  the  weighing 
and  readjustment.     (P.  5.) 

He  mentions  also  the  fact,  which  has  continued  to  be 
conspicuous  during  the  entire  administration  of  the  weight 
system,  that  after  a  weighing  railroads  will  change  their 
schedules  and  force  the  diversion  of  mails  from  the  routes 
upon  which  they  were  weighed  to  other  carrying  lines. 
(Pp.  5,  6.) 

Again,  in  regard  to  space,  he  stated  as  follows : 

The  difficulties  presented  above  are  but  a  few  of  those 
that  attend  the  operation  of  the  present  law,  but  are 
enough  to  warrant,  if  not  an  entirely  new  law,  at  least  a 
revision  of  the  present  one,  embodying  the  propositions 
set  forth  in  the  former  part  of  tliis  communication.     (P.  6.) 

And  again,  as  follows: 

The  advantages  to  the  Department  of  basing  the  com- 
pensation upon  space  would  therefore  be,  that  the  Depart- 
ment would  be  placed  in  a  position  where  it  could  indicate 
its  requirements  and  make  a  compensation  for  the  same 
accordingly  as  they  were  furnished.  If  at  any  time  an 
increase  was  desirable,  the  compensation  increasing 
directly  with  the  increased  service  required,  and  fixed  at 
an  equitable  rate,  there  would  be  no  difficulty  in  obtain- 
ing such  increase  of  accommodations.  By  contracting 
to  give  certain  rates  for  certain  accommodations,  if  at 
any  time  a  decrease  was  desirable,  the  Department  would 
have  no  difficulty  with  the  railroads,  if  they  notified  them 
that  such  was  the  case,  from  the  fact  that  the  Department 
would  occu])y  the  same  relations  toward  them  that  their 
other  customers  do. 

The  railroads  would  not  be  put  to  the  inconvenience  and 
expense  of  weighings,  nor  would  there  be  any  liability  of 
fraud  being  practiced  upon  the  Department  in  these 
weighings.  The  Department,  through  its  agents,  could 
indicate  the  space  required  and  the  number  of  trains  upon 
which  the  same  was  required,  and  a  very  simple  estiinate 
would  indicate  the  compensation. 

If  at  any  time  the  Department  considered  that  more 
accommodation  or  space  was  being  ))rovided  and  ])aid 
for  than  was  necessary  for  the  service  U])on  any  road,  it 
could  detail  an  agent  to  investigate  the  matter  and  re])ort, 
as  now  is  done  respecting  s])ace  and  room  for  post  ofhces 
•throughout  the  countrv.     In  fact  it  would  be  as  sensible 


742 

to  base  the  size  of  room  for  post  ofTices  upon  weight  of 
mails  as  to  base  the  comj)ensation  for  sj)ace  on  railroads 
mider  the  changed  conditions  of  the  Railway  Mail  Service, 
(p.  9.) 

After  referring  to  the  views  of  the  Department  upon 
the  question  of  mail  transportation  favoring  space  basis 
and  mentioning  the  classes  of  service  to  be  cared  for  in 
speaking  of  the  third  class  or  what  he  called  "baggage 
cars,  in  charge  of  railroad  employees,"  corresponding  to 
the  closed-pouch  service,  as  now  known,  he  said  as  follows: 

The  third  class  are  those  about  which  the  Department  has 
more  difficulty  with  the  railroads,  in  obtaining  permission 
to  forward  on  their  trains,  than  with  all  other  service, 
while  they  are  ]5erhaps  fuUy  as  important.  The  reason 
that  the  railroads  decline  the  use  of  their  trains  for  this 
class  of  service  is,  as  before  stated,  multiplying  the  labor 
while  it  does  not  increase  the  compensation.  This  class 
could  be  compensated  for  in  the  following  different  ways: 

First.  According  to  weight  and  distance  transported,  to 
be  ascertained  by  report  daily  or  quarterly  from  the  rail- 
roads and  post  offices.  This  is  the  manner  now  obtaining 
in  Canada. 

Second.  By  keeping  a  record  of  pouches  forwarded  and 
reducing  it  to  cubic  feet  occupied,  and  pay  accordingly. 

Third.  By  having  set  apart  on  each  train  upon  which 
the  Department  wished  to  forward  mails  and  using  such 
space  at  the  option  of  the  Department. 

The  first  and  second  methods  are  perhaps  too  cumbrous 
for  this  country,  with  its  vast  and  intricate  network  of 
railroads,  and  would  be  open  to  many  objections,  especially 
as  the  weight,  and  consequently  the  compensation,  would 
not  be  sufficient  to  warrant  the  complex  system  of  keeping 
the  accounts  that  would  be  necessary.  The  third  would  be 
simple  and  convenient,  while  the  same  guards  could  be 
thro\\ai  around  an 3^  excess  of  allowance  that  are  now  thrown 
around  all  other  post-oflicc  matters  that  can  not  be  abso- 
lutely fixed,  and  the  same  that  would  be  thrown  around 
the  allowance  for  space  for  route  agents'  apartments  and 
railway  post-office  cars. 

It  is  therefore  recommended  that  mail  conveyed  upon 
other  than  railway  post-office  or  route  agents'  trains  be 
compensated  for  according  to  actual  space  occupied, 
the  amount  of  this  space  to  be  ascertained  from  time  to 
time  by  actual  survey  and  estimate,  to  be  made  by  agents 
of  this  Department.  ^  (Pp.  10,  11.) 


743 

In  stating  reasons  why  there  should  be  one  gauge  or 
method  for  paying  for  mail  transportation,  and  noting  the 
fact  that  the  baggage  maUs  (at  that  time)  were  the  only 
mails  that  came  du'ectly  under  the  weight  basis,  he  said: 

And  the  question  is,  Should  the  whole  question  of  mail 
transportation  be  made  to  conform  to  their  requirements, 
or  should  they  be  made  to  conform  to  the  much  larger,  the 
mails  that  are  transported  in  route  agents'  and  railway 
post-ofhce  cars?     (P.  11.) 


Report  of  Senator  John  H.  Mitchell,  Subcommittee  oj  the 
Senate  Committee  on  Transportation  Routes  to  the  Sea- 
hoard,  June  23,  1874.  (43d  Cong.,  1st  sess.,  Rept.  No. 
478.) 

After  discussmg  the  relation  between  the  Federal  Gov- 
ernment and  the  raihoads  in  the  matter  of  mail  transporta- 
tion, the  report  continues: 

The  only  questions  here  to  be  discussed,  therefore,  relate 
simply  to  the  method  of  payment  and  to  the  amount  of 
payment. 

From  the  time  of  the  introduction  of  raUroads  m  this 
country  until  July  1,  1873  (act  of  Mar.  3,  1873),  the  various 
companies  were  paid  for  the  transport  of  the  mails  on  the 
general  basis  of  weight  carried.  The  mails  were  occasion- 
ally weighed  for  a  nmiiber  of  days  in  succession,  and  the 
average  of  these  weights  was  assumed  to  be  the  average 
weight  of  each  mail  carried  on  the  road,  until  the  next 
weighing.  The  weight  of  mails  and  the  distances  which 
they  were  carried  formed  the  basis  of  all  papncnts  to  rail- 
road corporations. 

The  postal  act  of  1845  provided  that  the  Postmaster 
General  should  arrange  the  railway  mail  routes  of  the 
country  into  three  classes,  according  to  size  of  mails,  speed 
at  which  carried,  and  frequency  and  importance  of  the 
service,  the  pay  for  routes  of  the  first  class  not  to  exceed 
S300,  of  the  second  class  not  to  exceed  -SI 00,  and  of  the 
third  class  not  to  exceed  S50  per  mile  of  road  per  annum, 
with  an  allowance  of  25  per  cent  in  case  one-half  the  serv- 
ice was  performed  during  the  night.  Under  these  .general 
provisions  of  the  law  the  compensation  of  the  several  roads 
was  granted  by  the  Postmaster  General,  the  size  of  the 
mails'' being  generally  dctennincd  by  their  weight.  It  is 
to  be  noted  that  thelaw  simply  fixed  maximum  limits  for 


744 


tlic  payments  of  the  three  classes  of  roads,  the  character 
of  the  service  ])erfoniie(l  hy  each  class  bemg  detennined, 

under  regulations,  by  the  Post  Ofhce  Department.  The 
raih'oads  of  the  country  being  thus  classified,  the  amount 
of  compensation  received  by  each  road  was  determined 
by  the  Postmaster  General,  or  by  one  of  his  agents  author- 
ized to  make  contracts  for  canying  the  mails,  the  only 
rules  for  their  guidance  in  each  particular  case  being  the 
law  and  regulations  just  mentioned  and  a  general  line  of 
precedents  based  upon  the  experience  of  the  Department 
in  the  transport  of  the  mails  by  rail.  The  rates  of  pay- 
ment then  established  are  shown  in  the  following  table: 

Common  average  weight  of  mails  on  railroad  routes  receiving  various  rates 
of  pay  previous  to  act  of  Mar.  3,  1873. 


Common  average  weight  of  mails  per  day. 

Rates  of 
pay  per 
mile  per 
annum. 

200  pounds 

$50 

500  pounds 

75 

2,000  pounds 

150 

6,248  pounds 

S200  to  275 

13,139  pounds 

18,470pounds 

375 

During  the  year  1864  the  post-office-car  system  was  first 
introduced.  By  distributing  the  mails  on  the  train  during 
their  passage  between  the  principal  cities,  the  time  for- 
merly required  in  their  work  of  distribution  at  all  important 
cities  was  saved.  The  system  has  proved  to  be  of  inesti- 
niable  value  to  society  and  to  commerce,  and  the  suspen- 
sion of  it,  or  the  abridgment  of  the  privileges  now  afforded 
the  Post  Office  Department  in  this  respect,  would  be  con- 
sidered a  great  public  detriment.  Soon  after  the  estab- 
lishment of  the  post-office-car  service  it  became  evident 
that  the  law  of  1845  under  which  the  payment  to  railroads 
for  carrying  the  mailp  was  based  upon  weight,  did  not 
provide  adequate  compensation  for  the  post-office-car 
service,  the  space  occupied,  instead  of  the  weight  carried, 
being  the  proper  measure  of  the  value  of  that  service. 
This  is  evident,  inasmuch  as  the  post-office  cars  are  seldom 
loaded  to  even  one-fourth  of  their  carrying  capacity  when 
expressed  in  weight.  To  meet  this  difficulty  the  act  of 
March  3,  1873,  was  jirepared  at  the  Post  Office  Dejiartment 
and  passed  by  Congress,  in  the  belief  that  its  provisions 
would  prove  to  be  just  to  the  Government  and  at  the  same 


745 

time  acceptable  to  the  railroad  companies.  It  was  also 
designed  to  enable  the  Post  OfRce  Department  to  concen- 
trate a  large  amoimt  of  mail  matter  upon  main  trunk  lines, 
and  thus  to  reduce  the  aggregate  cost  of  transportation. 
An  increase  on  the  weight  of  mails  carried  on  any  road  is 
also  pecuniarily  advantageous  to  the  railroads,  as  the 
weight  pa>/  alwa3^s  exceeds  the  cost  of  transportation  when 
carried  in  bulk.  Results  prove  that  this  end  has  been 
accomplished.      (Pp.  17,  18.) 


Letter  of  Theodore  N.  Vail,  General  Superintendent  Railway 
Mail  Service,  to  Hon.  Gardiner  G.  Hubbard,  cliairman  of 
the  Special  Committee  on  Railway  Mail  Service  Transpor- 
tation, Washington,  D.  C,  dated  January  13,  1877. 

By  this  letter  Mr.  Vail  transmitted  certain  tables  giving 
statistical  information,  and  in  regard  to  a  desirable  change 
in  the  law  of  1873,  stated  as  follows: 

I  do  not  think  I  could  say  anything  in  this  letter  that 
would  add  to  what  I  have  already  stated  to  your  committee 
of  the  absolute  necessity  for  some  change  in  the  method  of 
compensating  railroads  for  mail  transportation.     (P.  391.) 

The  interesting  feature  of  these  tables  is  that  they  state 
the  entire  railroad  mail  service  upon  a  space  basis,  not 
only  including  the  space  devoted  to  the  distribution  in 
railway  post-ofhce  cars,  but  the  space  necessary  for  trans- 
porting the  mails  in  baggage  and  storage  cars. 


Communications  to  the  Hubbard  Commission. 
Pennsylvania  Railroad  Co. : 

It  is  now  generally  conceded  that  the  rate  of  pay  should 
be  based  upon  space  in  car  or  of  car  occupied,  speed  at 
which  mails  are  transported,  and  the  importance  of  the 
service  performed  to  the  general  public,  each  of  which  may 
be  conclusively  ascertained,  the  first  being  of  record  at  the 
Post  Office  Department  and  the  second  on  the  published 
schedules  of  the  carrying  company,  while  the  third  will  of 
necessity  be  for  the  decision  of  the  Postm.aster-General. 
(Signed)  Strickland  Kneass.  (Report  of  The  Special  Com- 
mission on  Railway  Mail  Transportation.  G.  P.  O.  1878. 
P.  60.) 


746 

St.  Paul  &  Sioux  City  Railroad  Co. : 

The  mode  of  determining  the  rate  of  compensation  to 
roads  in  a  new  country  does  not  seem  just.  The  weight  of 
mails  carried  is  not  a  ^air  criterion.  All  the  costs  to  a  rail- 
road company  of  post-ofTice  cars,  lighting  and  warming, 
terminal  and  way  service,  carrying  messengers  and  agents, 
are  about  the  same  for  a  mail  averaging  1,000  pounds  as 
for  a  mail  of  500  pounds.     (Id.,  p.  76.) 


Report  of  General  Superintendent  Railway  Mail  Service, 
November  1,  1877,  Theodore  N.  Vail,  General  Superin- 
tendent. 

Mr.  Vail,  on  page  16,  referred  to  the  unsatisfactory  basis 
for  paying  for  railroad  mail  transportation,  and  indicating 
the  desirability  of  changing  to  a  space  basis,  in  the  following 
language : 

Under  the  present  law  the  payment  for  weight  is  greatly 
excessive  if  the  mail  is  carried  in  bulk  only,  while  the 
payment  for  car  space  is  greatly  deficient  where  long  postal 
cars  are  provided.  It  is  vastly  more  profitable  to  carry 
the  mails  in  bulk,  stowed  away  with  baggage.  It  is  there- 
fore to  be  expected  that  the  companies  will  not  furnish  car 
space  sufficient  for  the  proper  distribution  unless  there  be 
some  other  and  greater  inducement  than  that  now  afforded 
by  the  schedule  of  payment  for  postal  cars. 

As  the  department  can  by  a  simple  and  practicable 
change  in  the  present  law  be  placed  in  an  attitude  where 
it  can  negotiate  and  command,  rather  than  coax  and  beg, 
and  this,  too,  without  a  material  increase  in  the  expenses 
of  mail  transportation,  it  seems  but  reasonable  to  ask 
that  it  be  done.     (P.  16.) 

In  discussing  "essential  features  of  a  law  governing 
compensation  for  mail  transportation,"  he  stated  as 
follows : 

The  essential  elements  of  a  bill  to  regulate  the  compen- 
sation to  railroad  companies  for  the  transportation  oi  the 
mails  are — 

First.  Payment  in  proportion  to  the  service  performed — 
increasing  Avith  increase  of  service;  decreasing  Avith  de- 
crease of  service;  recognizing  frequency,  quality,  and 
efficiency  of  the  service.     (P.  17.) 


747 

Letter  from  the  Postmaster  General  transmitting  the  report  of 
the  committee  appointed  to  devise  a  more  complete  system 
of  gauging  the  rates  of  pay  for  carrying  the  mails  on  rail- 
road routes.  {JfSth  Cong.,  1st  sess.,  H.  Doc.  No.  35.) 
{The  Elmer- Thompson-Slater  Commission,  1883.) 

This  commission  was  a  departmental  commission  which 
investigated  the  subject  fully  and  reported,  inter  alia,  as 
follows : 

The  idea  has  been  advanced  in  some  quarters  that  acor- 
rect  basis  of  compensation  might  be  obtained  by  a  com- 
parison of  freight  rates,  with  increased  allowances  for  the 
greater  speed  at  which  the  mail  cars  are  conveyed. 

The  fallacy  of  all  such  reasoning  will  easily  appear  on  re- 
versing the  proposition.  It  would  be  counted  an  illogical 
f)roceeding  to  attempt  to  deduce  freight  tariffs  from  data 
urnished  by  passenger  traffic.  The  mails  form  a  part  of 
the  passenger  trains,  the  mail  pay  is  counted  a  part  of  the 
passenger  train  receipts,  the  cars  are  conveyed  at  the  same 
rate  of  speed  at  nearly  the  same  cost  per  linear  foot  per 
mile  run  as  the  rest  of  the  train. 

All  conclusions,  therefore,  as  to  the  mail  transportation 
should,  in  justice,  be  drawn  from  comparisons  in  the  pas- 
senger traffic.  And  if  it  can  be  sho^\Ti  that  the  system 
hereafter  recommended  by  the  committee  will  in  general 
result  in  giving  to  the  railroad  companies  a  rate  of  pay 
proportional  to  the  space  occupied  by  the  mail  apartments, 
no  just  grounds  of  complaint  will  exist.  The  committee 
must  assume,  further,  that  the  Department  can  not  enter 
into  the  matter  of  making  discriminations  in  pay  as  be- 
tween those  roads  having  a  large  or  a  small  amount  of 
traffic;  or  as  between  those  roads  that  were  costly  or  other- 
wise in  construction,  costly  or  otherwise  in  maintenance; 
or  as  between  those  situated  east  or  west  of  a  fixed  meridian, 
north  or  south  of  a  given  parallel.  All  these  things  will  be 
found  suggested  in  the  correspondence:  but  the  adoption 
of  any  such  features  wovdd  simply  defeat  in  advance  any 
general  and  uniform  method  of  dealing  with  the  subject 
of  railway  mail  transportation. 

****** 

But  it  was  the  unanimous  judgment  of  the  committee 
that  if  they  should  once  admit  as  an  element  such  contin- 
gencies and  exceptions,  there  would  be  an  end  to  the  pos- 
sibility of  any  result  from  their  labors.  They  have  agreed, 
therefore,  upon  a  uniform  schedule,  as  better  and  safer 
than  any  plan  which  would  practically  leave  the  whole 
matter  open  to  discretion  or  arbitration.     (P.  13.) 


748 

THE    BASIS   OF    COMPENSATION. 

Taking  up  the  subject  in  the  order  indicated  in  the 
letter  put  forth  by  the  committee,  we  come  first  to  the 
basis  on  which  the  rate  of  compensation  shoukl  be  deter- 
mined. 

Tlie  changed  concUtions  of  the  service  compel  a  different 
basis  on  which  to  estimate  the  rate  of  pay.  The  present 
system  is  cumbrous,  and  is  gauged  chiefly  by  the  weight  of 
the  mails,  which  is  not  the  only  element  to  be  considered. 

Since  weight  no  longer  enters  as  the  chief  factor  in  the 
determination  of  the  requirements  of  the  service — space 
being  the  chief  thing — weight  becomes  a  modifying  ele- 
ment only  as  it  helps  to  determine  what  space  will  be 
required,  fixing  a  definite  limit  to  the  amount  of  space  to 
be  used  and  paid  for  on  all  roads. 

The  problem  is,  therefore,  to  determine  approximately 
the  amount  of  space  required  in  every  instance,  and  the 
value  of  it,  applying  to  this  required  space  the  rate  allowed, 
as  deduced  from  some  average  space  value,  modified  by 
the  allowance  for  the  rate  of  speed  at  which  the  mails  are 
conveyed.  Whilst  the  reasonableness  of  shifting  the  basis 
from  weight  to  space  is  apparent,  still  a  word  of  explanation 
may  be  necessary  as  to  the  part  that  weight  is  to  play  in 
the  new  scheme  proposed  by  the  committee.     (P.  14.) 

Following  the  above  statement  the  commission  expresses 
apprehension  that  if  space  alone  be  the  measure  it  might 
lead  to  abuse  of  discretion  in  authorizing  space,  and 
suggest  that  a  check  upon  the  space  authorized  might  be 
secured  by  weighings  of  the  mails. 

Upon  the  application  of  the  law  of  competition,  the 
commission  stated  as  follows : 

Since  the  Railway  Postal  Service^by  the  very  nature 
of  it— is  debarred  from  those  advantageous  rates  of  which 
it  might  avail  itself  if  competition  were  possible,  it  would 
seem  to  be  but  fair  and  natural  that  the  laws  which  obtain 
in  competition  should  also  hold  here,  at  least  in  part. 

One  well-known  authority  on  transportation,  writing  of 
governmental  regulation  of  railroad  tariffs,  says,  in  reply 
to  the  question  whether  a  railroad  shall  carry  its  freight 
and  passengers  for  the  same  that  other  lines  charge,  or 
not  carry  them  at  all— 

"All  that  has  to  be  known  by  the  railroad  manager  to 
answer  this  question  is  the  minimum  cost  at  which  the 
service  can  bo  performed.  If  the  obtainable  rate  exceeds 
cost,  no  matter  how  little,  it  becomes  his  interest  to  accept 
the  terms  offered." 


749 

The  application  of  this  well-known  principle  in  the  opera- 
tion of  railroads,  so  far  as  the  mails  are  concerned,  would  be, 
not  to  argue,  in  the  absence  of  competition,  that  the  mails 
should  be  carried  as  if  under  competition,  at  the  smallest 
margin  above  cost,  or  at  the  minimum  of  profit;  but  rather 
to  argue  that  the  scheme  of  the  committee  should  not  be 
open  to  fatal  objection  simply  because  it  did  not  reach  the 
maximum  of  profit  on  comparison  with  other  items  of  pas- 
senger traffic.  In  other  words,  as  the  Government  could 
not,  in  justice,  demand  the  railroads  to  carry  the  mails  at 
rates  so  low  as  to  be  practically  unremunerative,  so  neither 
could  the  railroads  fairly  demand  the  highest  possible  rate 
of  compensatioxi.     (Pp.  15,  16.) 

The  recommendations  of  the  conunittee,  so  far  as  they 
relate  to  space,  were  as  follows: 

(1)  That  the  compensation  to  the  railroads  for  carrying 
the  mails  shall  be  determined  upon  the  basis  of  the  space 
used  and  the  frequency  and  speed  with  which  the  mails  are 
conveyed. 

(2)  That  the  space  factor  shall  be  determined  by  the 
Postmaster  General,  in  view  of  the  needs  of  the  service, 
modified  by  the  weight  and  frequency  of  the  mails;  that 
the  speed  factor  shall  be  determined  by  the  schedules  of 
the  various  railroads  in  connection  with  the  official  reports 
of  the  Railway  Mail  Service. 

(3)  That  the  pay  for  all  mail  transportation  shall  here- 
after be  at  a  fixed  rate  per  Imear  foot  of  car  per  mile  run. 
This  rate  to  cover  the  entire  cost  of  the  service,  furniture, 
and  fixtures  in  the  car,  transportation  of  postal  clerks,  etc. 

(4)  That  the  Postmaster  General  may  at  any  time  order 
an  increase  or  a  reduction  in  the  amount  of  space  to  be 
paid  for,  if,  after  a  weighing,  it  be  found  that  tliere  has  been 
a  sufficient  increase  or  diminution  in  the  amount  of  mails 
transported  on  any  railroad  to  require  the  same. 

(5)  The  closed  or  pouch  mails,  now  carried  in  express  or 
baggage  car,  without  postal  clerks  accompanying  them, 
requiring  no  space  for  distribution  en  route,  shall  be  paid 
for  on  the  following  basis,  viz,  the  aggregate  weight  of  the 
closed  or  pouch  mails  carried  on  any  road  on  all  trains  for 
24  hours  shall  be  made  the  basis  of  pay,  and  this  aggregate 
weight  reduced  in  an  equivalent  in  linear  feet  of  car  space 
in  the  following  proportions: 

Two  hundred  pounds  of  mad  or  loss  shall  bo  rated  as  the 
equivalent  of  6  linear  inches,  to  bo  paid  for  at  the  rate  of 
5  miUs  per  linear  foot  per  mile  run. 


750 

Five  Iniudrod  pounds  of  mail  shall  bo  rated  as  1  linear 
foot,  and  for  oacli  additional  500  pounds  1  linear  foot  of 
car  space  shall  ])0  allowed,  with  the  proviso  that  the  pay  for 
transportation  of  mails  upon  any  railroad  route  for  six 
round  trips  per  week  shall  not  be  less  than  $35  per  mile 
per  annmii.     (P.  16.) 

The  commission  received  numerous  communications 
from  railroad  companies  in  response  to  inquiries  sent 
out  askuig,  among  other  things,  a  statement  with  reference 
to  the  proper  basis  for  fixing  compensation.  The  following 
named  companies  favored  space  more  directly  than  other 
bases,  while  many  favored  a  combination  of  space  and 
weight,  and  some  favored  a  modification  by  consideration 
of  speed: 

Boston  &  LoweU  Railroad: 

As  a  proper  basis  for  compensation,  would  say  that  when 
carried  in  postal  cars  it  is  our  opinion  a  price  per  foot  per 
mile  for  space  furnished  should  be  paid,  instead  of  a  price, 
as  at  present,  based  on  weight,  for  the  reason  that  where 
postal  cars  are  run  it  is  as  great  an  expense  to  run  the 
car  with  a  light  weight  of  mails  as  to  run  it  heavily  freighted, 
the  difference  in  expense  to  the  railroad  being  well-nigh 
impossible  to  estimate. 

When  the  mails  are  carried  in  baggage  cars  we  would 
suggest  a  price  per  pouch  or  sack  per  mile  carried  as  a 
more  equitable  basis  than  by  weight;  and  it  is  our  opinion 
that  Government  should  assume  the  outside  service,  viz, 
the  transportation  of  the  mails  between  the  stations  and 
the  offices,  which  is  now  in  many  cases  assumed  by  the 
railroad  corporations.     (P.  26.) 

Carolina  Central  Railroad  Co.: 

I  respectfully  suggest  that  railroad  lines  should  be  com- 
pensated for  mail  service,  not  only  in  proportion  of  weight 
of  mails  carried,  but  in  proportion  to  space  occupied  and 
other  service  performed.     (P.  28.) 

Chesapeake  &  Ohio  Railway  Co.: 

That  the  present  law  regulatmg  the  transportation  of 
mails  by  rail,  if  not  a  failure,  is  conceded  by  all  parties 
concerned  to  be  decidedly  unsatisfactory,  but  just  what 
should  be  substituted  for  it  seems  to  be  a  difficult  question 
to  decide.  The  principal  objections  to  the  present  law 
are,  in  my  opinion— 


T61 

First.  That  it  is  not  equitable  in  its  effect,  inasmuch  as 
it  pays  to  the  railway  no  more  for  service  performed  on  a 
number  of  trains  each  way  over  the  road  daily  than  for  the 
same  amount  of  service  on  a  single  train  each  way  daily— 
when  it  is  a  well-established  fact,  not  only  with  railways, 
but  with  business  enterprises  in  general,  that  it  costs  more 
to  perform  a  certain  amount  of  work  at  different  times 
than  to  do  the  same  service  at  one  time.     *      *     * 

Second.  It  pretends  to  fix  the  compensation  to  be  paid 
for  the  transportation  on  the  average  \yeights  of  mails 
carried,  and  yet  provides  for  but  one  weighing,  and  that 
to  be  done  at  the  commencement  of  the  term,  which 
average  weights  must  govern  the  rate  of  compensation  for 
service  performed  by  the  railway  company  during  the 
entire  tenn  of  four  years,  notwithstanding  the  fact  that 
there  is  a  natural  increase  in  the  weights  of  mails  carried 
of  about  10  per  cent  each  year,  thus  compelling  the  carrier 
to  perform  a  very  considerable  part  of  the  service  free  or 
without  compensation.     (P.  33.) 

This  complaint  regarding  the  system  of  weighing  not 
less  frequently  than  once  in  every  four  years  is  complained 
of  by  many  in  their  communications,  and  the  groimd  of 
the  complaint  is  appHcable  to  any  system  of  weighing 
wliich  is  not  contmuous. 

Kansas  City,  Fort  Scott  &  Gulf  Raih^oad  Co.: 

When  mail  is  carried  on  regular  passenger  trams,  which 
are  run  with  special  reference  to  the  passenger  business, 
the  compensation  for  carrying  it  should  be  at  least  what 
the  raihoad  company  can  earn  by  using  the  space  required 
by  the  Post  Office  Department  for  some  other  purpose. 
That  space  can  certainly  be  filled  in  one  direction  with 
goods  paying  first-class  rates,  and  usually  in  both  direc- 
tions. Compensation  should  be  allowed  for  carrying  clerks 
and  agents,  possibly  one-half  the  first-class  rates,  for  the 
fuel  and  Ughts  used,  and  for  carrying  the  mail  between 
post  offices  and  the  cars.     (P.  44.) 

Knox  &  Lincoln  Railroad  Co.: 

First.  I  do  not  consider  that  the  pay  for  transporting 
mails  on  short  roads  running  two  or  more  trains  each  way 
daily,  with  separate  apartments  for  the  service  and  carry- 
ing only  local  mails,  should  be  based  on  weight  alone.  It 
makes  httle  difference  with  a  railroad  comptiny  whether 
they  carry  one  or  two  thousand  pounds  of  mail  a  day. 


T5g 

The  New  York  Central  &  Hudson  Kiver  Railroad  Co. : 

We  are  of  the  opmion  that  the  basis  of  speed  and  space 
are  the  proper  elements  to  use  in  order  to  arrive  at  a  just 
anil  equitable  compensation,  and  as  the  service  is  per- 
formed by  the  passenger  trains  the  rate  should  not  be  less 
than  the  average  rate  received  for  such  service.     (P.  52.) 

Northern  llailroad: 

As  a  proper  basis  for  compensation,  would  say  that 
when  carried  in  postal  cars  or  compartments  of  cars  with 
Government  clerks  in  charge,  it  is  our  opuiion  a  price 
per  foot  per  mile  for  space  furnished  should  be  paid  instead 
of  a  price  as  at  present  based  on  weight,  for  the  reason 
that  when  postal  cars  are  run  it  is  as  great  an  expense  to 
run  the  car  with  a  light  freight  of  mails  as  to  run  heavily 
freighted,  the  difference  in  expense  to  the  railroad  being 
well-nigh  impossible  to  estimate. 

When  the  mails  are  carried  in  baggage  cars,  we  would 
suggest  a  price  per  pouch  or  sack  per  mile  carried  as  a  more 
equitable  basis  than  by  weight;  and  it  is  our  opmion  that 
the  Government  should  assume  the  outside  service,  viz, 
the  transportation  of  the  mails  between  the  stations  and 
the  offices,  which  is  now  in  many  cases  assimied  by  the 
railroad  corporations.     (P.  54.) 

Northern  Pacific  Railroad  Co. : 

I  thmk  it  is  beyond  question  that  the  basis  of  comi3en- 
sation  should  be  the  car  space  required  for  the  accommo- 
dation of  the  service  and  not,  as  now,  the  supposed  weight 
of  the  mails  carried.  The  present  basis  (weight)  is  in- 
equitable. The  facilities  requu-ed  to  be  furnished  for  the 
carrying  and  handlmg  of  the  mails  render  the  actual  value 
of  the  service  impossible  of  computation  on  the  weight  of 
the  matter  carried;  and  the  same  or  equal  facilities  must 
be  provided  (within  reasonable  limits)  whatever  the  weight 
of  the  mails  may  be.  The  difference  m  the  actual  cost  of 
transportmg  1  ton  and  10  tons  weight  of  mails  is  almost 
inappreciable,  considermg  the  room  and  other  accommoda- 
tions that  must  in  any  case  be  furnished.  Besides  this, 
the  present  system  is  uncertain  and  therefore  unsatis- 
factory both  to  the  Department  and  the  raih'oad  com- 
pany.    (P.  55.) 

Richmond  &  Danville  Railroad,  Charlotte,  Columbia  & 
Augusta  Railroad,  Coliunbia  &  Greenville  Railroad,  and 
the  Virginia  Midland  Railway  Co. : 

Compensation  for  space  and  speed  per  tram-mile  would 
more  nearly  meet  the  requirements  than  any  other  simple 
basis,   if  the  length   of  haul,   the  weight  of  mails  to  be 


753 


handled,  the  proportion  of  locked  mails  which  are  sent  in 
charge  of  the  railway  companies'  ofhcers,  and  the  number 
of  agents  of  the  department  transported  are  taken  into 
account  in  fixhig  the  rate  of  compensation.      (P.  59.) 


Report  of  the  Postmaster  General  for  18S4. 

The  Postmaster  General  in  his  report  for  1884,  page  23, 
referred  to  the  rej^ort  of  the  committee  on  revision  of  laws 
gorernmg  postal  transportation  by  railroads  and  to  the 
fact  that  its  leading  recommendations  were  embodied  in  a 
bill  then  before  Congress.  He  refers  to  the  analysis  made 
by  the  Second  Assistant  Postmaster  General  in  that  part 
of  his  report  entitled  "Railroad  rates"  and  concludes 
with  this  recommendation : 

Manifestly  there  is  need  of  once  more  revising  this 
most  important  work,  and  I  would  strongly  recommend 
that  the  bill  proposed  be  given  careful  consideration,  that 
for  the  sake  of  economy  and  justice  this  measure  may 
become  the  law  for  the  future  guidance  of  this  department. 
(Report  of  the  Postmaster  General,  1884.  P.  106,) 

The  proposed  bill  referred  to  is  set  forth  in  full  on  page 
106  of  the  report  and  is  a  space-basis  bill  in  all  respects. 


Report  of  the  Joint  Commission  to  Investigate  the  Postal 

Service    (Loud- Wolcott    Commission).     (o6th    Cong.,  2nd 

sess.,  H.  Rept.  No.  2284,  1901.) 

In  the  testimony  taken  before  this  commission  the  fol- 
lowmg  witnesses  favored  space  as  the  basis  for  compensa- 
tion : 

Marshall  M.  Kirkman,  second  vice  president  Chicago  & 
North  Western  Railway. 

Q.  After  all,  it  is  a  question  of  space,  is  it  not,  Mr.  Kirk- 
man?— A.  So  far  as  the  Post  Office  Department  is  con- 
cerned, no.  It  is  a  question  of  service.  We  render  many 
services  to  the  Post  Office  Department  that  we  do  not 
render  to  anybody  else  and  that  are  not  paid  for  nor  con- 
nected with  the  mail  proper  as  a  matter  of  fact. 

Q.  We  understand  that;  but,  in  comparing  it  with  ex- 
press, would  that  not  be  the  best  method  of  comparison— 
the  amount  of  space  you  furnish  the  express  company  and 

122698—19 48 


754: 

the  ainoiiut  of  space  you  furnisli  tlie  mail? — A.  That,  in 
1117  judgment,  is  the  proper  basis  of  compensation,  adding 
to  it  what  we  furnish  the  Post  Office  Department  that  we 
do  not  furnish  the  express  company, 

(Printed  testimony.  Part  I,  p.  217.) 

Erastus  Young,  general  auditor  of  the  Union  Pacific 
System : 

It  has  been  said  akeady  that  to  speak  of  the  rates  paid 
for  mail  service  as  so  much  per  ton  per  mile  is  misleading. 
This  is  not  only  because  of  the  special  services  required  in 
connection  with  the  carrying  of  the  mails,  but  also  be- 
cause of  the  large  amount  of  car  space  required  for  a  cer- 
tain weight  of  mails  as  compared  with  freight.  In  fact, 
the  car  space  required  would  be  a  much  fairer  measure  of 
the  mail  service  than  the  weight  carried. 

(Printed  testimony.  Part  I,  p.  349.) 

W.  S.  Shallenberger,  Second  Assistant  Postmaster- 
General: 

If  your  intent  through  this  investigation  is  to  secure  a 
new  basis  of  compensation,  then  space  and  speed,  rather 
than  weight,  should  be  considered. 

(Printed  testimony,  Part  I,  p.  403.) 

Edward  D.  Kenna,  first  vice  president  and  general  solici- 
tor of  the  Atchison,  Topeka  &  Santa  Fe  Railway  Co.: 

Having  ascertained  the  amount  it  has  cost  us  to  move  all 
of  our  passenger  trains  during  the  year,  then  we  can  ap- 
portion to  the  total  cost  of  the  mail  service  that  part  which 
it  bears  to  the  total  cost  of  movmg  our  passenger  trains. 
I  should  say  that  we  have  adopted  the  space  basis  in  this 
apportionment,  and  for  reasons  which  seem  to  be  fair  and 
to  make  it  the  only  reasonable  basis  to  adopt.  I  think 
there  is  none  other  that  you  can  adopt. 

(Printed  testimony.  Part  I,  p.  560.) 

Albert  W.  SuUivan,  general  superintendent  of  the  Illinois 
Central  Raihoad: 

Q.  Now,  what  in  your  opinion  should  be  the  basis  of 
compensation  between  the  Government  and  the  raihoads 
for  carrying  the  mails;  should  it  be  based  upon  space  ? — A. 
Space  is  the  more  important. 

Q.  Wliat  other  elements  enter  into  consideration  ?— A. 
Space  and  weight. 

Q.  And  speed,  or  service? — A.  Yes,  sir;  frequency  of 
service  and  speed. 

Q.  Those  are  the  elements  ? — A.  Yes,  sir. 

(Printed  testimony,  Part  I,  pp.  607,  608.) 


755 

Cited  by  Mr,  Bradley.  Paper  read  before  the  commis- 
sion, "Cost  of  transportation  on  American  railroads,"  by 
Albert  Fink: 

The  great  difference  between  the  cost  and  compensation 
is  the  result  of  basing  the  latter  upon  the  net  weight  of 
the  mail  for  the  actual  distance  carried,  wliile  in  reality 
these  elements  do  not  mfluence  the  cost  of  the  service 
materially.  Nor  does  the  law  make  any  provision  in  case 
the  mail  is  carried  on  more  than  one  train.  The  compen- 
sation is  the  same,  whether  accommodations  for  the  service 
have  to  be  provided  on  one  or  five  trains. 

(Printed  testimony,  Part  II,  p.  148.) 

V.  J.  Bradley,  superintendent  Railway  Mail  Service: 

Out  of  2,587  mail  routes  there  are  over  800  which  earn 
S42.75  or  less  per  mile  of  route  per  year,  thus  indicating 
that  they  carry  200  pounds  or  less  per  route  mile  per  day. 
In  these  cases,  if  there  is  single  daily  service  each  way  over 
the  route,  there  would  be  an  average  of  100  pomids  or 
less  per  train  per  day.  If  there  is  double  daily  service 
each  way,  there  would  be  an  average  of  50  pounds  per  train 
per  day;  and  so  the  average  weight  per  train  would  dwindle 
downi  accordingly  as  the  frequency  of  service  increases. 

Surely  the  use  of  the  term  "tonnage"  in  relation  to  these 
routes,  forming  one-third  of  all  the  routes  in  the  country,'  is 
a  misnomer. 

The  same  criticism  could  be  made  in  a  modified  degree 
regarding  the  other  1,600  routes,  including  some  sample 
routes  just  quoted  above,  where  the  greatest  proportion  of 
trains  in  number  carry  small  average  quantities  of  mail. 

There  seems  to  be  no  class  of  traffic  that  is  similar  in 
character  and  frequency  to  the  mail  business  in  its  relation 
to  railroad  transportation.  The  calculations  that  have 
been  made  on  the  basis  of  tonnage  are  not  only  in  great 
degree  antagonistic  to  the  conditions  of  the  service,  but 
they  also  naturally,  though  improperly,  invite  comparison 
with  freight  service.  The  assumption  is  that  the  mails  are 
moved  in  carload  lots,  or  simdar  large  quantities,  so  that 
it  would  be  suitable  and  even  desirable  that  in  fixing  the 
rate  of  pay  for  raikoad  transportation  the  rate  per  ton  per 
mile  should  be  made  the  primary  specification.     (P.  152.) 

Cited  by  Mr.  Bradley  as  views  expressed  before  the 
Elmer  Thompson-Slater  Commission,  1883. 

(1)  TJie  New  Yorl  Central  &  Hudson  Rivfr  Railroad. — 
This  company  expressed  the  opinion  that  the  bases  of  speed 
and  space  are  the  proper  elements  to  use  to  arrive  at  just 
compensation,  and  as  the  service  is  performed  on  passenger 


756 

trains,  the  rate  should  not  be  less  than  the  average  rate 
for  this  service. 

(Prmted  testimony,  Part  II,  p.  162.) 

Comment  on  the  sfTcral  propof^itions. — It  is  to  be  observed 
from  these  various  recommendations,  just  as  has  already 
been  pointed  out,  that  space  required  and  occupied  is  the 
factor  which  all  these  mvestigators  agreed  upon  as  a 
fundamental  basis  for  a  proper  rate  of  pay,  this  recom- 
mendation agreemg  with  the  best  expert  opinion  within 
the  postal  service.  It  is  also  believed  that  if  the  pay  were 
arranged  on  the  basis  of  space  needed  and  occupied  the 
appropriation  would  not  be  subject  to  such  rapid  mcreases 
which  have  been  experienced  because  of  the  constantly 
augmented  weight  of  mail  carried,  which  has  not  involved 
the  allotment  of  space  in  anything  like  the  same  proportion. 
This  is  illustrated  by  the  testimony  that  the  average  load 
carried  by  the  average  postal  car  is  about  2  tons,  whereas 
its  capacity  in  the  space  allowed  for  storage  would  ordinarily 
carry  from  4  to  6  tons. 

(Printed  testimony.  Part  II,  p.  164.) 

The  Loud-Wolcott  Commission  stated  in  regard  to  space 
as  a  basis  of  compensation  as  follows : 

The  commission,  while  recognizing  that  the  question  of 
"space"  must  be  considered  as  having  a  strong  influence 
upon  the  question  of  the  reasonableness  of  the  present 
railway  mail  pay,  feels  unwilling  to  recommend  it  as  the 
controlling  standard  by  which  the  rates  of  compensation 
for  the  transportation  of  the  mails  shall  be  fixed,  because 
of  the  impossibility,  w4th  the  evidence  before  the  com- 
mission, of  applymg  the  "space"  basis  of  paynient  to  the 
carriage  of  the  mails.  (Report  of  joint  commission  to  in- 
vestigate the  Postal  Service.  G.  P.  O.  1901.  56th  Cong.  2d 
Ses.  Rep.  No.  2284,  p.  15.) 

Congressman  E.  F.  Loud,  a  member  of  the  commission, 
reported  specially  upon  space  as  follows: 

Space,  m  my  opinion,  should  be  the  basis  of  pay;  and  I 
reach  this  conclusion  from  the  fact,  which  must  be  ap- 
parent to  everyone  who  has  made  a  careful  study  of  this 
question,  that  space  is  the  principal  and  therefore  should 
be  the  controUmg  factor. 

The  testimony  shows  that  the  average  weight  of  mail 
carried  compared  with  the  carrying  capacity  of  the  space 
used  is  as  one  to  twenty  and  over,  which,  of  course,  renders 
the  ratio  of  unknown  factors  or  uncertainties  to  known 
factors  or  certainties  as  one  to  twenty  and  over. 

The  carrying  capacity  of  a  given  amount  of  space  is 
easily  ascertamable,  and  when  obtained  it  would  seem  to 


757 

be  not  a  difficult  task  to  find  the  carrying  capacity  of 
similar  space  either  upon  freight  or  passenger  trains,  or 
both;  or,  to  express  myself  in  another  way,  on  the  basis  of 
weight  the  unknown  factors  are  as  twenty  to  one,  while  on 
the  basis  of  space  the  known  and  unknown  would  seem  to 
balance,  and  the  result  more  nearly  scientific  and  mathe- 
matically more  accurate. 

It  may  be  urged,  and  it  is  the  testimony  of  some,  that 
under  the  space  basis  the  tendency  would  be  to  unduly 
increase  the  space,  hence  increase  the  rate  of  pay  beyond 
what  would  be  fair  and  just.  To  admit  this  would,  to  my 
mind,  be  a  conclusion  that  our  executive  officials  are  mcom- 
petent  or  corrupt,  and  almost  a  conclusion  that  our  form 
of  government  is  a  failure.  Experience  has  taught  me  that 
our  officials  are  honest,  careful,  and  painstaking,  and  coni- 
petent.  I  believe  that  a  larger  degree  of  personal  responsi- 
bility placed  upon  the  officials  would  result  m  a  more 
efficient  and  economical  admmistration,  especially  of  this 
branch  of  our  governmental  affairs,  which  is  a  busmess 
branch  wholly.  And  if  this  basis  be  adopted.  Congress 
then,  as  now,  would  hold  the  purse  strmgs  and  could 
appropriate  for  only  so  much  space  as  it  saw  fit,  after  a 
careful  investigation  of  the  recommendations  of  the 
department  and  in  their  opinion  the  demands  of  the 
service  required. 

Under  the  present  system  railway  post-office  cars,  which 
I  denominate  space,  are  so  small  a  factor  of  consideration 
in  the  total  of  mail  pay  that  there  is  not  the  incentive  to 
curtail  space  that  there* would  naturally  be  where  space  was 
the  whole  or,  at  least,  the  controlling  factor.  Under  the 
present  system,  especially  on  the  light  routes  using  railway 
post-office  cars,  each  increasing  pound  of  weight  means 
mcreased  compensation.  On  the  basis  of  space  no  increase 
in  compensation  would  result  from  any  increase  of  weight 
until  at  least  the  maximum  carrymg  capacity  of  the  car 
had  been  reached..  Or,  to  express  it  another  way,  it  would 
require  substantially  the  same  space  to  distribute  4,000 
pounds  as  8,000  pounds  of  mail.  It  would  remove  the 
expensive  and  aggravating  system  of  weighing  which  is 
now  had  upon  each  system  once  in  four  years.  It  would 
simplify  the  now  complex  mail  system,  so  that  the  average 
mind  could  comprehend  the  subject. 

There  will  be  urged  as  one  of  the  objections  to  this  sys- 
tem that  some  of  our  service  is  pouch  service  and  the  space 
to  be  occupied  is  difhcult  of  measurement.  That  is  true, 
but  pavment  for  such  service  couhl  easily  be  made  upon 
the  basis  of  average  number  carried  for  a  period  of  30  days 
to  fix  the  rate  for  one  year.     {Id.,  pp.  22,  23,  24.) 


758 

Letter  from  the  Postmaster  General  submitting  a  report  giving 
the  results  of  the  inquirg  as  to  the  operation,  receipts,  and 
expenditures  of  railroad  companies  transporting  the  mails, 
and  recommending  legislation  on  the  subject.  {6 2d  Cong., 
1st  sess.,  H.  Doc.  No.  105,  1911.) 

Postmaster  General  Hitchcock  in  this  report  transmitted 
to  the  Speaker  of  the  House  of  Representatives  on  August 
12,  1911,  the  results  of  the  investigation  made  by  the  Post 
Office  Department  under  authority  of  the  act  of  March  3, 
1879.  His  report  submitting  the  results  stated  in  part 
as  follows : 

The  act  of  March  3,  1879,  chapter  180,  section  6  (20 
Stat.  L.,  358),  provides  as  follows: 

''The  Postmaster  General  shall  request  all  railroad  com- 
panies transporting  the  mails  to  furnish,  under  seal,  such 
data  relating  to  the  operating,  receipts,  and  expenditures  of 
such  roads  as  may,  in  his  judgment,  be  deemed  necessary 
to  enable  him  to  ascertain  the  cost  of  mail  transportation 
and  the  proper  compensation  to  be  paid  for  the  same ;  and 
he  shall,  in  his  annual  report  to  Congress,  make  such  recom- 
mendations, founded  on  the  information  obtained  under 
this  section,  as  shall,  in  his  opinion,  be  just  and  equitable." 
Under  the  authority  granted  the  Postmaster  General  by 
this  provision  of  law  the  railroad  companies  carrying  the 
mails  were  instructed,  in  the  summer  of  1909,  to  formulate 
during  the  month  of  November  in  that  year  the  data  the 
Department  requested,  in  order  to  enable  it  to  determine 
the  cost  to  such  railroads  of  mail  transportation.  The 
information  called  for  was  reported  in  great  detail  to  the 
Department,  where  it  has  been  carefully  tabulated  and 
analyzed,  under  the  direction  of  the  Second  Assistant  Post- 
master General  and  a  committee  of  departmental  officers, 
whose  report  on  the  subject  is  herewith  inclosed. 

The  committee  finds,  as  a  result  of  the  inquiry,  that  the 
amount  of  mail  service  performed  by  railroad  conjpanies 
can  be  ascertained  in  comparison  with  the  passenger  and 
express  services  they  perform,  thus  permitting  an  appor- 
tionment of  the  revenues  and  expenses  among  these  three 
classes  of  service.  By  this  method,  which  has  not  been 
previously  employed,  it  is  also  found  possible,  for  the  first 
time,  to  determine  the  total  expense  chargeable  to  the  per- 
formance of  mail  service  in  comparison  with  the  revenue 
received  by  the  company  therefor  and  to  show  the  gain  or 
loss  in  the  aggregate,  or  by  the  unit  of  service;  that  is,  by 
the  car-foot  mile. 


759 

It  develops,  from  the  calculations  made  on  this  basis, 
after  a  proper  assignment  of  operating  expenses  and  taxes 
and  a  full  consideration  of  all  other  factors  of  expense,  that 
the  performance  of  mail  service  at  the  present  rates  is 
profitable  to  certain  railroad  companies  and  unprofitable 
to  others.  Taken  as  a  whole,  it  is  shown  that  the  railroad 
companies  are  receiving  from  the  Government  for  trans- 
portmg  marls  payments  considerably  in  excess  of  the  cost 
of  such  service.  The  committee  estimates  that  through  a 
readjustment  of  railway  mail  pay  on  the  basis  of  cost  with 
6  per  cent  profit  a  saving  to  the  Government  could  be  made 
of  about  S9,000,000. 

The  laws  now  in  force  relative  to  railway  mail  pay  pro- 
vide that  the  compensation  shall  be  adjusted  on  the  basis 
of  the  average  daily  weights  carried  over  the  several  estab- 
lished railway  routes  and  that  an  additional  amount  may 
be  allowed  for  railway  post-office  cars  when  the  space  for 
distribution  purposes  occupies  40  feet  or  more  of  the  car 
length.  No  additional  compensation  is  allowed  for  space 
for  distribution  purposes  occupying  less  than  40  feet  of  the 
car  length.  This  distmction  is  a  purely  arbitrary  one  and 
without  any  logical  reason  for  its  existence.  It  affords  a 
striking  example  of  the  unscientific  and  unbusinesslike 
methods  now  followed  in  adjusting  railway  mail  pay. 

The  desirability  of  a  revision  of  these  methods  has  been 
long  recognized,  but  the  Department  has  hitherto  failed  to 
make  specific  recommendations  to  Congress.  As  the  result 
of  the  inquiry  just  completed,  however,  it  is  now  prepared 
to  suggest  a  plan  that  is  beUeved  to  be  a  decided  improve- 
ment over  existing  methods. 

An  essential  feature  of  the  plan  is  the  requirement  that 
all  railways  shall  report  annually  to  the  Postmaster  General, 
followmg  the  methods  of  the  recent  inquirv,  the  expenses 
they  incur  in  carrying  the  mails,  this  information  to  be 
used  by  the  Department  in  determining  the  cost  to  the 
railways  and  a  fair  rate  of  profit.  Under  the  new  plan  the 
method  of  fixing  railway  mail  pay  in  accordance  with 
weight  will  be  entirely  abandoned.  The  weighing  process 
has  not  only  proved  to  be  a  most  expensive  operation,  but 
it  has  been  quite  unsatisfactory  as  a  basis  for  adjusting 
compensation.  It  is  proposed  to  substitute  for  this  process 
the  method  of  fixing  compensation  in  accordance  ^vith  the 
amount  of  space  required  in  cars  for  the  distribution  and 
carriage  of  the  mads,  making  ])rf)per  allowances,  of  course, 
for  the  extent  and  frequency  of  the  service  ])erfuriiuMl. 
(P.  3.) 


760 

Report  of  the  Joint  Committee  on  Postage  on  Second-class 
Mail  Matter  and  Compensation  for  the  Transportation  of 
Mail.  {Aug.  31,  1914,  6Sd  Cong.,  2d  sess.) 
The  report  of  Postmaster  General  Hitchcock  (H,  Doc. 
No.  105,  62(1  Cong.,  1st  sess.),  resulted  in  the  appointment 
of  a  joint  committee  of  the  Senate  and  House  of  Repre- 
sentatives to  make  inquiry  into  the  subject  of  postage  on 
second-class  mail  matter  and  compensation  for  the  trans- 
portation of  mail  under  authority  of  the  act  of  August  24, 
1912.  This  committee  held  extensive  hearings,  the  details 
of  which  are  printed  in  the  "Preliminary  Report  and 
Hearings  of  the  Joint  Committee  on  Postage  on  Second- 
class  Mail  Matter  and  Compensation  for  the  Transporta- 
tion of  Mail,  of  the  Congress  of  the  United  States,  January 
24,  1913,  to  April  3,  1914,  Government  Printing  Office, 
1914,"  and  made  "Report  of  the  Joint  Committee  on 
Postage  on  Second-class  Mail  Matter  and  Compensation 
for  the  Transportation  of  Mail,  August  31,  1914,  Sixty- 
third  Congress,  second  session.  Government  Printing 
Office,  1914."  In  this  report  the  space  basis  was  recom- 
mended in  the  following  language: 

SPACE    AS    A    SUBSTITUTE    FOR    WEIGHT. 

This  brings  us  to  a  consideration  of  the  space  basis  as  a 
substitute  for  the  present  system. 

While  one's  first  impression  is  that  weight  is  the  chief 
factor  in  determining  all  transportation  costs  and  charges, 
a  more  careful  consideration  of  the  subject  will  show  that 
this  is  not  the  case. 

The  bulk  of  the  freight  business  is  carried  in  what  are 
known  as  carload  lots.  In  the  carload  freight  business, 
space  is  taken  into  consideration  in  that  a  minimum  weight 
per  car,  varying  with  the  bulk  of  the  commodity,  is  fixed, 
and  the  shipper  must  pay  at  least  the  minimum  carload 
rate  regardless  of  the  amount  of  freight  in  the  car.  In 
fixing  rates  upon  different  commodities  shipped  in  less  than 
carload  lots,  the  bulk  of  the  commodity  as  well  as  its  weight 
receives  consideration.  For  example,  a  carriage  or  furni- 
ture that  is  taken  apart  and  packed  into  a  crate  will  be 
transported  at  a  less  charge  than  the  same  article  shipped 
set  up.  The  reason  for  the  difference,  although  the  weight 
be  identical,  is  that  in  one  instance  less  space  is  occupied 
than  in  the  other. 


761 

The  same  principle  obtains,  in  general,  in  fixing  passen- 
ger rates.  The  charge  is  so  much  per  passenger,  whether 
the  passenger  be  a  heavy  man  or  a  light  man.  The  same 
is  true  in  the  fixing  of  fullman  fares.  A  certain  amount 
is  charged  for  the  use  of  a  berth  whether  it  be  occupied  by 
one  or  two  persons. 

The  justification  for  this  consideration  of  space  in  fixing 
transportation  charges  in  the  passenger  service  is  that  the 
car  itself  weighs  more  than  its  contents.  This  is  also  true 
in  the  case  of  mail.  A  storage  car  contains  the  largest 
quantity  of  mail  which  it  is  possible  to  sliip  in  one  convey- 
ance. Yet,  the  steel  storage  car  weighs  about  50  tons, 
while  the  mail  it  carries  usually  would  not  exceed  10  tons. 
In  the  ordinary  post-office  car,  however,  so  much  of  the 
space  is  used  for  the  distribution  of  mail  that  on  an  average 
only  2  to  3  tons  of  mail  matter  is  carried,  while  the  car 
itself,  if  of  steel,  weighs  some  60  tons. 

It  wiU  readily  be  seen,  therefore,  that  if  the  radroad 
company  is  required  to  haul  60  tons  of  car  and  only  2  to  3 
tons  of  mad  therein,  the  chief  source  of  expense  is  in  the 
transportation  of  the  car,  not  in  the  transportation  of  its 
contents.  If  the  Government,  for  the  purpose  of  facili- 
tating the  rapid  distribution  of  mail,  chooses  to  load  a  car 
with  only  2  to  3  tons  of  mail,  it  should  pay  the  railroad  on  a 
basis  that  will  afford  a  reasonable  compensation  for  the 
hauling  of  both  car  and  contents. 

Heretofore  the  railroads  have  received  their  compensa- 
tion in  two  classes — first,  for  the  transportation  of  a  certain 
quantity  of  mail  ascertained  by  weight;  and,  second,  a 
charge  for  space  in  and  haulage  of  railway  post-office  cars 
40  feet  or  more  in  length  utilized  for  mail  distribution  in 
transit.  Tliis  is  an  express  recognition  of  the  right  of  the 
radi'oads  to  compensation  for  hauling  the  working  space. 
We  are  already  on  a  partial  space  basis. 

It  is  to  the  interest  of  the  Government,  however,  to  fix 
the  compensation  on  such  a  basis  as  will  encourage  the 
department  and  its  employees  to  utilize  all  the  space  it  is 
practicable  for  them  to  use.  Naturally,  it  will  be  the 
desire  of  the  department  to  make  as  good  a  record  as  pos- 
sible for  economical  management.  If  the  entire  compen- 
sation be  based  upon  a  standard  of  space,  the  supervisory 
officials  in  the  department  will  encourage  and  require 
their  employees  to  utilize  that  space  as  fullv  and  cconomi- 
call}-  as  possible.  The  judicious  expenditure  of  public 
mone}-  will  thus  be  encouraged  and  economic  waste 
minimized. 


762 

ADVANTAGES    OF    SPACE   BASIS. 

Wo  favor  the  adoption  of  space  rather  than  weight  as  the 
basis  for  measuring  the  service  rendered,  for  the  following 
reasons : 

It  permits  fluctuation  of  mail  pay  with  every  material 
fluctuation  in  the  service. 

It  eliminates  the  cost  and  inconvenience  of  the  cjuad- 
rennial  weighing. 

It  eliminates  the  temptation  for  dishonest  efforts  ta 
either  deplete  or  pad  mails  during  the  weighing  periods, 
because  it  abolishes  all  weighing. 

It  minimizes  waste  by  encouraging  the  Post  Office 
Department  to  utilize  as  nearly  as  possible  all  the  space 
it  pays  for  in  mail  cars. 

It  constitutes  a  system  of  compensation  so  definite, 
simple,  and  clear  that  any  citizen  can  understand  it  and 
can  know  exactly  what  service  each  railroad  is  rendering, 
its  rate  of  pay,  and  the  amount  of  annual  compensation. 

Rapid  development  of  the  Parcel  Post  Service  furnishes 
another  strong  reason  for  the  substitution  of  space  for 
weiglit  as  a  basis  of  railway  mail  compensation.  Since 
expansion  of  the  parcel  post,  the  quadrennial  weidiing 
has  become  much  more  unsatisfactory  as  a  means  of  deter- 
mining the  compensation  to  be  paid  for  transportation. 
(Pp.  63,  64.) 

The  committee  reported  a  bill  authorizing  and  directing 
the  Postmaster  General  to  readjust  the  compensation  of 
steam  railroad  companies  for  the  transportation  of  the 
mails  along  the  lines  of  its  recommendation.     (Pp.  21-23.) 

Following  this  report  the  Congress  enacted  the  law  of 
July  28,  1916,  commonly  referred  to  as  the  "Space- 
basis  act,"  under  the  provisions  of  which  the  Postmaster 
General  restated  the  principal  part  of  the  service  upon  the 
space  basis,  and  filed  his  statement  with  the  Interstate 
Commerce  Commission  for  the  purposes  named  in  the  act. 
The  proceedings  herein  followed. 


Appendix  C. 

THE  STATUTES  PRESCRIBING  THE  RATES  OF  PAY  pOR 
THE  TRANSPORTATION  OF  THE  MAILS  BY  RAILROADS 
AND  THEIR  PERFORMANCE  OF  SERVICE  IN  CONNEC- 
TION THEREWITH. 

Ad  of  January  25,  1839  {5  Stat.  314). 

Be  it  enacted  hy  the  Senate  and  House  of  Rejjresentatives 
of  the  United  States  of  America  in  Congress  assembled,  That 
the  Postmaster  General  shall  not,  by  virtue  of  the  authority 
vested  in  him  by  the  second  section  of  the  ''Act  to  establish 
certain  post  routes  and  to  discontinue  others,"  approved 
July  seventh,  eighteen  hundred  and  thirty-eight,  allow 
more  than  three  hundred  dollars  per  mile  per  annum  to 
any  railroad  company  in  the  United  States  for  the  con- 
veyance of  one  or  more  daily  mails  upon  their  roads: 
Provided,  That  nothing  in  this  act  contained  shall  be  con- 
strued so  as  in  any  way  to  remove  or  impair  the  limitations 
upon  the  power  of  the  Postmaster  General  imposed  by  that 
section. 


Act  of  MarcJi  3,  1845  (5  Stat.  738). 

Sec.  19.  And  he  it  further  enacted,  That  to  insure,  as  far 
as  may  be  practicable,  an  equal  and  just  rate  of  compensa- 
tion, according  to  the  service  performed,  among  the  several 
railroad  companies  in  the  United  States,  for  the  transpor- 
tation of  the  mail,  it  shall  be  the  duty  of  the  Postmaster 
General  to  arrange  and  divide  the  railroad  routes,  including 
those  in  which  the  service  is  partly  by  railroad  and  partly 
by  steamboats,  into  three  classes  according  to  the  size  of 
the  mails,  the  speed  with  which  they  are  conveyed,  and  the 
importance  of  the  service;  and  it  shall  be  lawful  for  him  to 
contract  for  conveying  the  mail  with  any  such  railroad 
company,  either  with  or  without  advertising  for  such  con- 
tract: Provided,  That  for  the  conveyance  of  the  mad  on 
any  raikoad  of  the  first  class,  he  shall  not  pay  a  higher  rate 
of  compensation  than  is  now  allowed  by  law;  nor  for  carry- 
ing the  mail  on  any  railroad  of  the  second  class,  a  greater 
compensation  than  one  hundred  dollars  per  mile  per  an- 
num; nor  for  carrying  the  mail  on  any  railroad  of  the  third 
(763) 


764 

class,  a  greater  compensation  than  fifty  dollars  per  mile  per 
annum.  And  in  case  the  Postmaster  General  shall  not  be 
a])le  to  conclude  a  contract  for  carrying  the  mail  on  an}^  of 
such  railroad  routes,  at  a  compensation  not  exceeding  the 
aforesaid  maximum  rates,  or  for  what  he  may  deem  a 
reasonable  and  fair  compensation  for  the  service  to  be  per- 
formed, it  shall  be  lawful  for  him  to  separate  the  letter 
mail  from  the  residue  of  the  mail,  and  to  contract,  either 
with  or  without  advertising,  for  conveying  the  letter  mail 
over  such  route,  by  horse  express  or  otherwise,  at  the 
greatest  speed  that  can  reasonably  be  obtained;  and  also 
to  contract  for  carrying  over  such  route  the  residue  of  the 
mail,  in  wagons  or  otherwise,  at  a  slower  rate  of  speed: 
Provided,  That  if  one-half  of  the  service  on  any  railroad 
is  required  to  be  performed  in  the  night  season,  it  shall  be 
lawful  for  the  Postmaster  General  to  pay  twenty-five  per 
cent  in  addition  to  the  aforesaid  maximum  rates  of  allow- 
ance: And  provided  Jurther,  That  if  it  shall  be  found  neces- 
sary to  convey  over  any  railroad  route  more  than  two  mails 
daily,  it  shall  be  lawful  for  the  Postmaster  General  to  pay 
such  additional  compensation  as  he  may  think  just  and 
reasonable,  having  reference  to  the  service  performed  and 
the  maximum  rate  of  allowance  established  by  this  act. 

Act  of  July  28,  1916  {39  Stat,  412  {425,  431)). 

Tliat  the  Postmaster  General  is  authorized  and  directed 
to  readjust  the  compensation  to  be  paid  to  railroad  com- 
panies from  and  after  the  thirtieth  day  of  June,  nineteen 
hundred  and  sixteen,  or  as  soon  thereafter  as  may  be  prac- 
ticable, for  the  transportation  and  handling  of  the  mails 
and  furnishing  facilities  and  services  in  connection  there- 
with upon  the  conditions  and  at  the  rates  hereinafter  pro- 
vided. 

The  Postmaster  General  may  state  railroad  mail  routes 
and  authorize  mail  service  thereon  of  the  following  four 
classes,  namely:  Full  railway  post-office  car  service,  apart- 
ment railway  post-office  car  service,  storage-car  service,  and . 
closed-pouch  service. 

Full  railway  post-office  car  mail  service  shall  be  service 
by  cars  forty  feet  or  more  in  length,  constructed,  fitted  up, 
and  maintained  for  the  distribution  of  mails  on  trains. 
The  authorizations  of  full  railway  post-office  cars  shall  be 
for  standard-sized  cars  sixty  feet  in  length,  inside  measure- 
ment, except  as  hereinafter  provided. 

Apartment  railway  post-office  car  mail  service  shall  be 
service  by  apartments  less  than  forty  feet  in  leno;th  in  cars 
constructed,  fitted  up,  and  maintained  for  the  distribution 


765 

of  mails  on  trains.  Two  standard  sizes  of  apartment  rail- 
way post-office  cars  may  be  authorized  and  paid  for, 
namely,  apartments  fifteen  feet  and  thirty  feet  in  length, 
inside  measurement,  except  as  hereinafter  provided. 

Storage-car  mail  service  shall  be  service  by  cars  used  for 
the  storage  and  carriage  of  mails  in  transit  other  than  by 
full  and  apartment  railway  post-office  cars.  The  authori- 
zations for  storage  cars  shall  be  for  cars  sixty  feet  in  length, 
inside  measm-ement,  except  as  hereinafter  provided:  Pro- 
vided, That  storage  space  in  units  of  three  feet,  seven  feet, 
fifteen  feet,  and  thirty  feet,  both  sides  of  car,  may  be  author- 
ized in  baggage  cars  at  not  exceeding  pro  rata  of  the  rates 
hereinafter  named  for  sixty-foot  storage  cars. 

Service  by  full  and  apartment  railway  post-office  cars 
and  storage  cars  shall  include  the  carriage  therein  of  all 
mail  matter,  equipment,  and  supplies  for  the  mail  service 
and  the  employees  of  the  Postal  Service  or  Post  Office 
Department,  as  shall  be  directed  by  the  Postmaster  General 
to  be  so  carried. 

Closed-pouch  mail  service  shall  be  the  transportation  and 
handling  by  railroad  employees  of  mails  on  trains  on  which 
full  or  apartment  railway  post-office  cars  are  not  author- 
ized, except  as  hereinbefore  provided.  The  authoriza- 
tions for  closed-pouch  service  shall  be  for  units  of  seven  feet 
and  thi'ee  feet  in  length,  both  sides  of  car. 

The  rates  of  payment  for  the  services  authorized  in  ac- 
cordance with  this  section  shall  be  as  follows,  namely: 

For  full  railway  post-office  car  mail  service  at  not  exceed- 
ing 2>1  cents  for  each  mile  of  service  by  a  sixty-foot  car. 

In  addition  thereto  he  may  allow  not  exceeding  S4.25  as 
a  combmed  initial  and  terminal  rate  for  each  one-way  trip 
of  a  sixty-foot  car. 

For  apartment  railway  post-office  car  mail  service  at  not 
exceeding  1 1  cents  for  each  mile  of  service  by  a  thirty-foot 
apartment  car  and  6  cents  for  each  mile  of  service  by  a 
fifteen-foot  apartment  car. 

In  addition  thereto  he  may  allow  not  exceeding  .S2.75  as 
a  combmed  initial  and  terminal  rate  for  each  one-wav  trip 
of  a  thu-ty-foot  apartment  car  and  .S2  as  a  combined  initial 
and  terminal  rate  for  each  one-way  trip  of  a  fifteen-foot 
apartment  car. 

For  storage-car  mail  service  at  not  exceeding  21  cents 
for  each  mile  of  service  by  a  sixty-foot  car. 

In  addition  thereto  he  may  allow  not  exceeding  S4.25  as 
a  combined  initial  and  terminal  rate  for  each  one-way  trip 
of  a  sixty-foot  car. 

Where  authorizations  are  made  for  cars  of  the  standard 
lengths  of  sixty,  thirty,  and  fifteen  feet,  as  provided  by  tliis 
section,  and  the  railroad  company  is  unable  to  furnish  such 


766 

cars  of  the  length  authorized,  but  furnishes  cars  of  lesser 
lengtli  than  those  authorized,  but  which  are  determined  by 
the'^department  to  be  sufficient  for  the  service,  the  Post- 
master General  may  accept  the  same  and  pay  only  for  the 
actual  space  furnished  and  used,  the  compensation  to  be 
not  exceeding  pro  rata  of  that  provided  by  this  section  for 
the  standard  length  so  authorized:  Provided,  That  the 
Postmaster  General  may  accept  cars  and  apartments  of 
greater  length  than  those  of  the  standard  requested,  but 
no  compensation  shall  be  allowed  for  such  excess  lengths. 

For  closed-pouch  service,  at  not  exceeding  H  cents  for 
each  mile  of  service  when  a  three-foot  unit  is  authorized, 
and  3  cents  for  each  mile  of  service  when  a  seven-foot  unit 
is  authorized. 

In  addition  thereto  he  may  allow  not  exceeding  2.5  cents 
as  the  combined  initial  and  terminal  rate  for  each  one-way 
trip  of  a  three-foot  imit  of  service  and  50  cents  as  a  com- 
bined initial  and  terminal  rate  for  each  one-way  trip  of  a 
seven-foot  unit  of  service. 

Railroad  companies  whose  railroads  were  constructed  in 
whole  or  in  part  by  a  land  grant  made  by  Congress,  on  the 
condition  that  the  mails  should  be  transported  over  their 
roads  at  such  price  as  Congress  should  by  law  direct,  shall 
receive  only  eighty  per  centum  of  the  compensation  other- 
wise authorized  by  this  section. 

The  initial  and  terminal  rates  provided  for  herein  shall 
cover  expenses  of  loading  and  unloading  mails,  switching, 
lighting,  heating,  cleanmg  mail  cars,  and  all  other  expenses 
incidental  to  station  service  and  required  by  the  Post- 
master General  in  connection  with  the  mails  that  are  not 
included  in  the  car-mile  rate.  The  allowance  for  full 
railway  post-office  cars,  apartment  railway  post-office  cars, 
and  storage  cars  may  be  varied  in  accordance  with  the 
a,pproximate  difference  in  their  respective  cost  of  con- 
struction and  maintenance. 

In  computing  the  car  miles  of  the  full  railway  post-office 
cars  and  apartment  railway  post-office  cais,  the  maximum 
space  authorized  in  either  direction  of  a  round-trip  car 
rim  shall  be  regarded  as  the  space  to  be  computed  in  both 
directions,  unless  otherwise  mutually  agreed  upon. 

In  computing  the  car  miles  of  storage  cars,  the  maximum 
space  authorized  in  either  direction  of  a  round-trip  car  run 
shall  be  regarded  as  the  space  to  be  computed  in  both 
directions,  unless  the  car  be  used  by  the  company  in  the 
return  movement,  or  otherwise  mutually  agreed  upon. 

New  service  and  additional  service  may  be  authorized 
at  not  exceeding  the  rates  herein  provided,  and  service 


767 

may  be  reduced  or  discontinued  with  pro  rata  reductions 
in  pa}',  as  the  needs  of  the  Postal  Service  may  require: 
Prodded,  That  no  additional  pay  shall  be  allowed  for 
additional  service  unless  specilically  authorized  by  the 
Postmaster  General. 

The  Postmaster  General  is  authorized  to  make  special 
contracts  with  the  railroad  companies  for  the  transporta- 
tion of  the  mails  where  in  his  judgment  the  conditions 
warrant  the  application  of  higher  rates  than  those  herein 
specified,  and  make  report  to  Congress  of  all  cases  where 
such  special  contracts  are  made  and  the  terms  and  reasons 
therefor. 

All  cars  or  parts  of  cars  used  for  the  Railway  Mail 
Service  shall  be  of  such  construction,  style,  length,  and 
character,  and  furnished  in  such  manner  as  shall  be  required 
by  the  Postmaster  General,  and  shall  be  constructed,  fitted 
up,  maintained,  heated,  lighted,  and  cleaned  by  and  at 
the  expense  of  the  railroad  companies.  No  pay  shall  be 
allowed  for  service  by  any  railway  post-office  car  which 
is  not  sound  in  material  and  construction  and  which  is  not 
equipped  with  sanitajy  drinking-water  containers  and 
toilet  facilities,  nor  unless  such  car  is  regularly  and 
thoroughly  cleaned.  No  pay  shall  be  allowed  for  service 
by  any  wooden  full  railway  post-office  car  unless  con- 
structed substantially  in  accordance  with  the  most 
approved  plans  and  specifications  of  the  Post  Office 
Department  for  such  type  of  cars,  nor  for  service  by  any 
wooden  full  railway  post-office  car  run  in  any  train  between 
adjoining  steel  cars,  or  between  the  engine  and  a  steel  car 
adjoming.  After  the  first  of  Jul}^,  nineteen  hundred  and 
seventeen,  the  Postmaster  General  shall  not  approve  or 
allow  to  be  used,  or  pay  for  ser^^ce  by,  any  fuU  railway 
post-office  car  not  constructed  of  steel  or  steel  underframe 
or  equally  indestructible  material;  and  ah  full  railway 
post-office  cars  accepted  for  this  ser^^ce  and  contracted 
for  by  the  railroad  companies  hereafter  shall  be  constructed 
of  steel.  Until  July  first,  nineteen  hundred  and  seventeen, 
in  cases  of  emergency  and  in  cases  where  the  necessities  of 
the  service  require  it,  the  Postmaster  General  may  pro^^de 
for  service  by  full  railway  post-office  cars  of  other  than 
steel  or  steel  underframe  construction,  and  fix  therefor 
such  rate  of  compensation  within  the  maximum  herein 
provided  as  shall  give  consideration  to  the  inferior  char- 
acter of  construction,  and  the  railroad  com]mnies  shall 
furnish  service  by  such  cars  at  such  rates  so  fixed. 

Service  over  property  owned  or  controlled  by  another 
company  or  a  termmal  company  shall  be  considered  serv- 
ice of  the  railroad  company  usmg  such  property  and  not 


768 

tliat  of  the  other  or  terminal  company:  Provided,  That 
service  over  land-gi-ant  roads  shall  be  paid  for  as  herein 
provided. 

liailroad  companies  carrying  the  mails  shall  furnish  all 
necessary  facilities  for  caring  for  and  handling  them  while  in 
their  custody.  They  shall  furnish  all  cars  or  j)arts  of  cars 
used  in  the  transportation  and  distribution  of  the  mails, 
except  as  herein  othermse  provided,  and  place  them  in 
stations  before  the  departm-e  of  trains  at  such  times  and 
when  required  to  do  so.  They  shall  provide  station  space 
and  rooms  for  handling,  storing,  and  transfer  of  mails  in 
transit,  including  the  separation  thereof,  by  packages  for 
connecting  lines,  and  such  distribution  of  registered  mail 
in  transit  as  may  be  necessary,  and  for  offices  for  the  em- 
ploA^ees  of  the  Railway  Mail  Service  engaged  in  such  station 
work  when  requh-ed  by  the  Postmaster  General,  in  which 
mail  from  station  boxes  may  be  distributed  if  it  does  not 
require  additional  space. 

If  any  railroad  company  carrying  the  mails  shall  fail  or 
refuse  to  provide  cars  or  apartments  in  cars  for  distribu- 
tion purposes  when  required  by  the  Postmaster  General, 
or  shall  tail  or  refuse  to  construct,  fit  up,  maintain,  heat, 
light,  and  clean  such  cars  and  provide  such  appliances  for 
use  in  case  of  accident  as  may  be  required  by  the  Post- 
master General,  it  shall  be  fined  such  reasonable  sum  as 
may,  in  the  discretion  of  the  Postmaster  General,  be 
deemed  proper. 

The  Postmaster  General  shall  in  all  cases  decide  upon 
what  trains  and  in  what  manner  the  mails  shall  be  con- 
veyed. Ever}^  railroad  company  carr3dng  the  mails  shall 
carry  on  any  train  it  operates,  and  with  due  speed,  all  mail- 
able matter,  equipment,  and  supplies  directed  to  be  carried 
thereon.  If  any  such  railroad  company  shall  fail  or  refuse 
to  transport  the  mails,  equipment,  and  supplies  when  re- 
quired by  the  Postmaster  General  on  any  train  or  trains  it 
operates,  such  company  shall  be  fined  such  reasonable 
amount  as  may,  in  the  discretion  of  the  Postmaster  Gen- 
eral, be  deemed  proper. 

The  Postmaster  General  may  make  deductions  from  the 
pay  of  railroad  companies  carrying  the  mails  under  the 
provisions  of  this  section  for  reduction  in  service  or  infre- 
quenc}^  of  service  where,  in  his  judgment,  the  importance 
of  the  facihties  withdrawal  or  reduced  requires  it,  and  im- 
pose fines  upon  them  for  delinquencies.  He  may  deduct 
the  price  of  the  value  of  the  service  in  cases  where  it  is  not 
performed,  and  not  exceeding  three  times  its  value  if  the 
failure  be  occasioned  by  the  fault  of  the  railroad  company. 


769 

The  provisions  of  this  section  shall  apply  to  S(M-vice 
operated  by  railroad  companies  partly  by  railroad  and 
partly  by  steamboats. 

The  provisions  of  this  section  respecting  the  rates  of 
compensation  shall  not  apply  to  mails  conveyed  under 
special  arrangement  in  freight  trains,  for  which  rates  not 
exceeding  the  usual  and  just  freight  rates  may  be  paid,  in 
accordance  with  the  classifications  and  tariffs  approved 
by  the  Interstate  Commerce  Commission. 

'  Railroad  companies  carrying  the  mails  shall  submit, 
under  oath,  when  and  in  such  form  as  may  be  requued 
by  the  Postmaster  General,  evidence  as  to  the  performance 
of  service. 

The  Postmaster  General  shall,  from  time  to  time, 
request  information  from  tlie  Interstate  Commerce  Com- 
mission as  to  the  reveime  received  by  railroad  companies 
from  express  companies  for  services  rendered  in  the 
transportation  of  express  matter,  and  may,  in  his  discre- 
tion, arrange  for  the  transportation  of  mail  matter  other 
than  of  the  first  class  at  rates  not  exceeding  those  so  ascer- 
tained and  reported  to  him,  and  it  shall  be  the  duty  of  the 
railroad  companies  to  carry  such  mail  -matter  at  such 
rates  fixed  by  the  Postmaster  General. 

The  Postmaster  General  is  authorized,  in  his  discretion, 
to  petition  the  Interstate  Commerce  Commission  for  the 
determination  of  a  postal  carload  or  less-than-carload  rate 
for  transportation  of  mail  matter  of  the  fom'th  class  and 
periodicals,  and  may  provide  for  and  authorize  such 
transportation,  when  practicable,  at  such  rates,  and  it 
shall  be  the  duty  of  the  railroad  companies  to  provide  and 
perform  such  service  at  such  rates  and  on  the  conditions 
prescribed  by  the  Postmaster  General. 

The  Postmaster  General  may,  in  his  discretion,  dis- 
tinguisli  between  the  several  classes  of  mail  matter  and 
provide  for  less  frequent  dispatches  of  mail  matter  of  the 
third  and  fourth  classes  and  periodicals  when  lower  rates 
for  transportation  or  other  economies  may  be  secured 
thereby  without  material  detriment  to  the  service. 

The* Postmaster  General  is  autliorized  to  return  to  the 
mails,  when  practicable  for  the  utilization  of  car  space 
paid  for  anc)  not4needed  for  tlie  mails,  postal  cards,  stamped 
envelopes,  newspaper  A\Ta])))(M-s,  em|)ty  nniil  bags,  furni- 
ture, equi])mcnt,  and  other  supplies  for  the  Postal  Service. 

The  Postmaster  General,  in  cases  of  emergency  between 
Octo])er  first  and  April  first  of  any  year,  may  hereafter 
return  to  the  mails  empty  mail  bags  and  other  equi]unent 
theretofore  witluh-awii  tlierefrom  as  required  by  law,  and, 
where  such  return    requires    additional    authorization   of 

122698—19 49 


770 

car  space  uudor  the  provisions  of  this  section,  to  pay  for 
the  transportation  thereof  as  provided  for  herein  out  of 
the  appropriation  for  inland  transportation  b}^  raih-oad 
routes. 

The  Postmaster  General  may  have  the  weights  of  mail 
taken  on  railroad  mail  routes,  and  computations  of  the 
average  loads  of  the  several  classes  of  cars  and  other  com- 
putations for  statistical  and  administrative  purposes  made 
at  such  times  as  he  may  elect,  and  pay  the  expense  thereof 
out  of  the  appropriation  for  inland  transportation  by  rail- 
road routes. 

Pending  the  decision  of  the  Interstate  Commerce  Com- 
mission, as  hereinafter  provided  for,  the  existing  method 
and  rates  of  railway  mail  pay  shall  remain  in  effect,  except 
on  such  routes  or  systems  as  the  Postmaster  General  shall 
select,  and  to  the  extent  he  may  find  it  practicable  and 
necessary  to  place  upon  the  space  system  of  pay  in  the 
manner  and  at  the  rates  provided  in  this  section,  with  the 
consent  and  approval  of  the  Interstate  Commerce  Com- 
mission, in  order  to  properly  present  to  the  Interstate 
Commerce  Commission  the  matters  hereinafter  referred 
thereto:  Provided,  That  if  the  final  decision  of  the  Inter- 
state Commerce  Commission  shall  be  adverse  to  the  space 
system,  and  if  the  rates  established  by  it  under  whatever 
method  or  system  is  adopted  shall  be  greater  or  less  than 
the  rates  under  this  section,  the  Postmaster  General  shall 
readjust  the  compensation  of  the  carriers  on  such  selected 
routes  and  systems  in  accordance  therewith,  from  the  dates 
on  which  the  rates  named  in  this  section  became  effective. 

All  railway  common  carriers  are  hereby  required  to 
transport  such  mail  matter  as  may  be  offered  for  trans- 
portation by  the  United  States  in  the  manner,  under  the 
conditions,  and  with  the  service  prescribed  by  the  Post- 
master General  and  shall  be  entitled  to  receive  fair  and 
reasonable  compensation  for  such  transportation  and  for 
the  service  connected  therewith. 

The  Interstate  Commerce  Commission  is  hereby  em- 
powered and  directed  as  soon  as  practicable  to  fix  and  de- 
termine from  time  to  tmie  the  fair  and  reasonable  rates 
and  compensation  for  the  transportation  of  such  mail 
matter  by  railway  common  carriers  and  the  service  con- 
nected therewith,  prescribing  the  method  or  methods  by 
weight,  or  space,  or  both,  or  otherwise,  for  ascertaining 
such  rate  or  compensation,  and  to  publish  the  same,  and 
orders  so  made  and  published  shall  continue  in  force  until 
ciianged  by  the  commission  after  due  notice  and  hearing. 

In  fixing  and  determining  the  fair  and  reasonable  rates 
for  such  service  the  commission  shall  consider  the  relation 
existing  between  the  railroads  as  public  service  corpora- 


T71 

tions  and  the  Government,  and  the  nature  of  such  service 
as  distinguished,  if  there  be  a  distmction,  from  the  ordinary 
transportation  business  of  the  railroads. 

The  procedure  for  the  ascertainment  of  said  rates  and 
compensation  shall  be  as  follows: 

Within  three  months  irom  and  after  the  approval  of 
this  act,  or  as  soon  thereafter  as  may  be  practicable,  the 
Postmaster  General  shall  file  with  the  commission  a  state- 
ment showmo;  the  transportation  required  of  all  railway 
common  carriers,  includmg  the  number,  equipment,  size, 
and  construction  of  the  cars  necessary  for  the  transaction 
of  the  business;  the  character  and  speed  of  the  trains 
which  are  to  carry  the  various  kinds  of  mail;  the  service, 
both  termmal  and  en  route,  which  the  carriers  are  to  render; 
and  all  other  mformation  which  ma}^  be  material  to  the 
inquiry,  but  such  other  information  may  be  filed  at  any 
time  in  the  discretion  of  the  commission. 

The  Postmaster  General  is  authorized  to  employ  such 
clerical  and  other  assistance  as  shall  be  necessary  to  carry 
out  the  provisions  of  this  section,  and  to  rent  quarters  in 
Washmgton,  District  of  Columbia,  if  necessary,  for  the 
clerical  force  engaged  thereon,  and  to  pay  for  the  same 
out  of  the  appropriation  for  inland  transportation  by  rail- 
road routes.  The  Postmaster  General  shall  file  with  the 
commission  a  comprehensive  plan  for  the  transportation 
of  the  mails  on  said  railways  and  shall  embody  therein 
what  he  believes  to  be  the  reasonable  rate  or  compensa- 
tion the  said  railway  carriers  should  receive. 

Thereupon  the  commission  shall  give  notice  of  not  less 
than  thirty  days  to  each  carrier  so  requu-ed  to  transport 
mail  and  render  service,  and  upon  a  day  to  be  fixed  by  the 
commission,  not  later  than  thirty  days  after  the  expiration 
of  the  notice  herein  required,  each  of  said  carriers  shall 
make  answer  and  the  commission  shall  proceed  with  the 
hearing  as  now  provided  by  law  for  other  hearings  between 
carriers  and  shippers  or  associations. 

All  the  provisions  of  the  law  for  taking  testimony, 
securing  evidence,  penalties,  and  procedure  are  hereby 
made  applicable. 

For  tlie  purpose  of  determining  and  fixing  rates  or  com- 
pensation hereunder  the  commission  is  authorized  to  make 
such  classification  of  carriers  as  may  be  just  and  rea<^on- 
able  and,  where  just  and  equitable,  fix  general  rates  appli- 
cable to  all  carriers  in  the  same  classification. 

Pending  such  hearings,  and  the  final  determination  of 
the  question,  if  the  Interstate  Commerce  Commission  shall 
determine  that  it  is  necessary  or  advisable,  in  order  to 


carry  out  the  ])rovisions  of  this  section,  to  liavc  additional 
and  niore  frequent  weigliinsi;  of  the  nuiils  for  statistical 
purposes,  the  I'ostmaster  General,  upon  request  of  the 
commission,  sliall  ])rovide  therefor  in  the  manner  now  pre- 
scrihed  by  law,  hut  such  \vei<,diin<2;  need  not  be  for  more 
than  thirty  days. 

At  the  conclusion  of  the  liearino-  the  Commission  shall 
establish  bA"  order  a  fair,  reasonable  rate  or  compensation 
to  be  received,  at  such  stated  times  as  may  be  named  in 
the  order,  for  the  transportation  of  mail  matter  and  the 
service  connected  therewith,  and  during;  the  continuance  of 
the  order  the  Postmaster  General  shall  pay  the  carrier  from 
the  a])propriation  herein  made  such  rate  or  compensation. 

Either  the  Postmaster  General  or  any  such  carrier  may 
at  any  time  after  the  lapse  of  six  months  from  the  entry  of 
the  order  assailed  apply  for  a  reexamination,  and  there- 
upon substantially  similar  proceedings  shall  be  had  with 
respect  to  the  i-ate  or  rates  for  service  covered  by  said 
application,  provided  said  carrier  or  carriers  have  an  interest 
therein. 

For  the  purposes  of  this  section  the  Interstate  Commerce 
Commission  is  hereby  vested  with  all  the  powers  which  it  is 
now  authorized  by  law  to  exercise  in  the  investigations  and 
ascertainment  of  the  justness  and  reasonableness  of  freight, 
passenger,  and  express  rates  to  be  paid  by  private  shippers. 

The  Interstate  Commerce  Commission  shall  alloAV  to  rail- 
road companies  whose  railroads  were  constructed  in  whole 
or  in  part  by  a  land  grant  made  by  Congress  on  condition 
that  the  mails  should  be  transported  over  their  roads  at 
such  price  as  Congress  should  by  law  direct  only  eighty  per 
centum  of  the  compensation  paid  other  railroads  for  trans- 
porting the  mails  and  all  service  by  the  railroads  in 
connection  therewith. 

The  existhig  law  for  the  determhiaticm  of  mail  pay, 
except  as  herein  modified,  shall  continue  in  effect  until  the 
Interstate  Commerce  Commission  muler  the  provisions 
hereof  fixes  the  fair,  reasonable  rate  or  compensation  for 
such  transportation  and  service. 

That  the  appropriations  for  inland  transportation  by  rail- 
road routes  and  for  railway  post-office  car  service  for  the 
fiscal  year  ending  June  thirtieth,  nineteen  hundred  and 
seventeen,  are  hereby  made  available  for  the  purposes  of 
this  section. 

That  it  shall  be  unlawful  for  any  railroad  company  to 
refuse  to  perform  mail  service  at  the  rates  or  methods  of 
compensation  provided  by  law  when  required  by  the  Post- 
master General  so  to  do,  and  for  such  oftense  shall  be  fined 
$1,000.  Each  day  of  refusal  shall  constitute  a  separate 
offense. 


773 

Act  of  Mar.  S,  1873,  17  Stat,  558,  B.  S.  4002. 

The  Postmaster  General  is  authorized  and  directed  to 
readjust  the  coinpensatiou  *  *  *  to  he  paid  for  the 
transportation  of  mails  on  railroad  routes  upon  the  con- 
ditions and  at  the  rates  hereinafter  mentioned: 

First.  That  the  mails  shall  he  conveyed  with  due  fre- 
quency and  speed;  and  that  sufficient  and  suitahle  room, 
fixtures,  and  furniture,  in  a  car  or  apartment  properly 
lighted  and  warmed,  shall  be  provided  for  *  *  *  (rail- 
way postal  clerks)  to  accompany  and  distribute  the  mails. 

Second.  That  the  pay  per  mile  per  annum  shall  not 
exceed  the  following  rates,  namely:  On  routes  carrying 
their  whole  length  an  average  weight  of  mails  i^er  day  of 
two  hundred  pomids,  fifty  dollars;  five  hundred  pounds, 
seventy-five  dollars;  one  thousand  pounds,  one  hundred 
dollars"^;  one  thousand  five  hundred  pounds,  one  hundred 
and  twenty-five  dollars;  two  thousand  pounds,  one  hun- 
dred and  fifty  dollars ;  three  thousand  five  hundred  pounds, 
one  hundred  and  seventy-five  dollars;  five  thousand  pounds, 
two  hundred  dollars,  and  twenty-five  dollars  additional  for 
every  additional  two  thousand  pounds,  the  average  weight 
to  be  ascertained,  in  every  case,  by  the  actual  weighing  of 
the  mails  for  such  a  number  of  successive  working  days, 
not  less  than  thirty,  at  such  times,  after  June  thirtieth, 
eighteen  hundred  and  seventy-three,  and  not  less  fre- 
quently than  once  in  every  four  years,  and  the  result  to  be 
stated 'and  verified  in  such  form  and  manner  as  the  Post- 
master General  may  direct. 

Act  of  July  12,  1876,  19  Stat.,  79. 

The  Postmaster  General  *  *  *  is  hereby  authorized 
and  directed  to  readjust  the  compensation  to  be  paid  from 
and  after  the  fu-st  day  of  July,  eighteen  hundred  and  sev- 
enty-six, for  transportation  of  mails  on  railroad  routes  by 
reducing  the  compensation  to  all  railroad  companies  for 
the  transportation  of  mails  t^n  per  centum  per  annum  from 
the  rates  fixed  and  allowed  by  the  first  section  of  an  act  en- 
titled "An  act  making  appropriations  for  the  service  of  the 
Post  Office  Department  for  the  fiscal  year  ending  June 
thirtieth,  eighteen  hundred  and  seventy-four,  and  for  other 
purposes,"  approved  March  third,  eighteen  hundred  and 
seventy-three  (R.  S.  §4002),  for  the  transportation  of  mails 
on  the  basis  of  the  average  weight. 


774 
Act  of  June  17,  1S78,  20  Stat.,  142. 

The  Postmaster  General  *  *  *  is  hereby  authorized 
and  directed  to  readjust  the  compensation  to  be  paid  from 
and  after  the  first  day  of  July,  eighteen  hunch-ed  and  sev- 
entj'-eight,  for  transportation  of  mails  on  railroad  routes 
by  reducing  the  compensation  to  all  railroad  companies  for 
the  transportation  of  mails  five  per  centum  per  annum  from 
the  rates  for  the  transportation  of  mails,  on  the  basis  of  the 
average  weight  fixed  and  allowed  by  the  [preceding  para- 
graph] first  section  of  an  act  entitled  "An  act  making  ap- 
propriations for  the  service  of  the  Post  Office  Department 
for  the  fiscal  year  ending  June  thirtieth,  eighteen  hundred 
and  seventy-seven,  and  for  other  purposes,"  approved  July 
twelfth,  eighteen  hundred  and  seventy-six. 

Act  of  March  2,  1907,  34  Stat.,  1212. 

The  Postmaster  General  is  hereby  authorized  and 
directed  to  readjust  the  compensation  to  be  paid  from  and 
after  the  first  day  of  July,  nineteen  hundred  and  seven,  for 
the  transportation  of  mail  on  railroad  routes  carrying  their 
whole  length  an  everage  weight  of  mails  per  day  of  upward 
of  five  thousand  j^ounds  by  making  the  following  changes 
in  the  present  rates  per  mile  per  annum  for  the  transporta- 
tion of  mail  on  such  routes,  and  hereafter  the  rates  on  such 
routes  shall  be  as  follows:  On  routes  carrying  their  whole 
length  an  average  weight  of  mail  per  day  of  more  than  five 
thousand  pounds  and  less  than  forty-eight  thousand 
pounds  the  rate  shall  be  five  per  centum  less  than  the 
present  rates  on  all  weight  carried  in  excess  of  five  thousand 
pounds;  and  on  routes  carrying  their  whole  length  an 
average  weight  of  mail  per  day  of  more  than  forty-eight 
thousand  pounds  the  rate  shall  be  five  per  centum  less  than 
the  present  rates  on  all  weight  carried  in  excess  of  five 
thousand  pounds  up  to  forty-eight  thousand  pounds,  and 
for  each  additional  two  thousand  pounds  in  excess  of  forty- 
eight  thousand  pounds  at  the  j-ate  of  nineteen  dollars  and 
twenty-four  cents  upon  all  roads  other  than  land-grant 
roads,  and  upon  all  land-grant  roads  the  rate  shall  be 
seventeen  dollars  and  ten  cents  for  each  two  thousand 
pounds  carried  in  excess  of  said  forty-eight  thousand 
pounds. 


Act  of  May  12,  1910,  36  Stat.,  362. 

The  provisions  of  the  act  of  March  second,  nineteen 
hundred  and  seven  [34  Stat.,  1212],  *  *  *  fixin":  the 
compensation  to  be  paid  for  transportation  of  mail  on  land- 
grant  railroads  at  the  rate  of  seventeen  dollars  and  ten 
cents  for  each  two  thousand  pounds  carried  in  excess  of 
forty-eio-ht  thousand  pounds,  is  hereby  amended  to  make 
such  rate  of  compensation  after  June  thirtieth,  nineteen 
hundred  and  ten,  fifteen  dollars  and  thirty-nine  cents  for 
each  two  thousand  pounds  carried  in  excess  of  forty-eight 
thousand  pounds,  and  the  Postmaster  General  is  hereby 
authorized  and  directed  to  readjust  the  compensation  in 
accordance  with  this  amendment. 


Act  of  March  3,  1905,  33  Stat.,  1088. 

That  hereafter  before  making  the  readjustment  of  pay 
for  transportation  of  mails  on  railroad  routes,  the  average 
weight  shall  be  ascertained  by  the  actual  weighing  of  the 
mails  for  such  a  number  of  successive  working  da^'s  not  less 
than  ninety,  at  such  times  after  June  thirtieth,  nineteen 
hundred  and  five,  and  not  less  frequently  than  once  in 
every  four  years,  and  the  result  to  be  stated  and  verified  in 
such  form  and  manner  as  the  Postmaster  General  may 
direct. 

Act  of  May  18,  1916,  39  Stat.,  161. 

When,  during  a  weighing  period,  on  account  of  floods  or 
other  causes,  interruptions  in  service  occur  on  lailroad 
routes  and  the  weights  of  mail  are  decreased  below  the 
normal,  or  where  there  is  an  omission  to  take  weights,  the 
Postmaster  General,  for  the  purpose  of  readjusting  corn- 
pensation  on  such  railroad  routes  as  are  affected  thereby,  is 
hereafter  authorized,  in  his  discretion,  to  add  to  the  weights 
of  mails  ascertained  on  such  routes  during  that  part  of  the 
weighing  period  when  conditions  are  shown  to  have  been 
normal,  the  estimated  weights  for  that  part  of  the  weighing 
period  when  conditions  are  shown  to  have  been  not  normal 
or  where  there  has  been  an  omission  to  take  weights,  based 
upon  the  average  weights  taken  during  that  ])art  of  the 
weighing  period  during  which  conditions  are  sliown  to 
have  been  normal,  the  actual  weights  and  the  estimated 
weights  to  form  the  basis  for  the  average  weight  ])er  day 
upon  which  to  readjust  the  compensation  according  to  law 
on  such  railroad  routes  for  the  trans])ortation  of  the  mails, 
notwithstanding    the   provision    of    the    act   of   Congress 


776 

api)roved  March  third,  nineteen  hundred  and  five,  requir- 
ing that  the  aAerage  weight  shall  l)e  ascertained  by  the 
actual  weighing  of  the  mails  for  such  a  number  of  succes- 
sive working  days,  not  less  than  ninety,  as  the  Postmaster 
General  may  direct:     *     *     * 

Revised  Statutes,  Sec.  4001 . 
***** 
All  railway  companies  to  which  the  United  States  have 
furnished  aid.  by  grant  of  lands,  right  of  way,  or  other- 
wise, shall  carry  the  mail  at  such  jjrices  as  Congress  may  by 
law  provide;  and,  until  such  price  is  fixed  by  law,  the 
Postmaster  General  may  fix   the  rate   of  com])ensation. 

Act  of  July  12,  1876.     19  Stat.,  82. 

Railroad  com])anies  whose  railroad  was  constructed  in 
whole  or  in  part  by  a  land  grant  made  by  Congress  on  the 
condition  that  the  mails  should  be  transported  over  their 
road  at  such  price  as  Congress  should  by  law  direct  shall 
receive  only  eighty  per  centum  of  the  compensation 
authorized  by  this  act. 


Appendix  D, 

SOME      GENERAL     CONSIDERATIONS     APPLICABLE     TO 
RATE  MAKING. 

COST    OF    SEKYICE. 

Traffic  as  a  whole  must  pay  operating  expenses  and 
taxes  and  >neld  a  fair  return  on  the  vahie  of  the  property 
employed  in  the  service. 

In  the  evolution  of  freight  rates  many  elements  other 
than  cost  have  been  given  primary  consideration  by  traffic 
managers  as  the  exigencies  of  the  business  of  the  carriers 
have,  from  time  to  time,  suggested.  The  carriers  have  at 
times  contended  before  the  Commission  that  in  the  making 
of  reasonable  rates  the  cost  of  service  is  practically  a 
negligible  factor  and  that  primary  weight  should  be  given 
to  the  value  of  the  service.^  However,  the  Supreme  Court 
has  decided  that  one  of  the  elements  to  be  considered  is 
the  cost  of  the  service.^ 

This  Commission  has  approved  attempts  to  ascertain 
cost,  even  though  such  attempts  must  employ  arbitraries 
of  many  kinds  and  varying  importance,  and  be  subject  to 
criticism,  checking,  and  correction,^  and  suggested  that 
cost  of  service  is  more  capable  of  exact  determination  and 
mathematical  expression  than  the  value  of  the  service.* 
When  comparative  cost  is  ascertained  it  may  become  the 
basis  for  a  scientific  determination  of  rates. ^ 

Costs  do  not  determine  rates;  yet  most  rates  have  within 
them  as  a  constituent  the  element  of  cost.®  Other  ele- 
ments, as  well,  must  be  considered,  and  the  weight  that 
shall  be  given  cost  as  compared  with  all  the  other  elements 
entering  into  a  particular  rate  and   the  conditions  sur- 

1  Advance  in  Rates— Western  Case  (20  I.  C.  C,  348,  349,  3.57). 

2  Smythe  v.  Ames  (169  U.  S.,  466).-    Nor.  Pac.  Ry.  v.  iV.  D.  (236  U.  S.,  596,  597). 
^Advancei  in  Rates—  Western  Case  (20  I.  C.  (;..  363),-  Boileau  v.  P.  H.  <fc  E.R.R.  Co.  (22 

I.C.C.,  6,52),-  Pitts.  Vein  Operators  of  Ohio  v.  Pa.  Co.  (24  I.  C.  C.  285). 

*  Boileau  v.  P.  L.  &  E.  R.  R.  Co.  (22  I.  C.  C,  652). 

i  Advances  in  Rates—  We.itern  Case  (20  I.  C.  C,  362). 

i  Boileau  v.  P.  L.  &  E.  R.  R.  Co.  (22  I.  C.  C,  K2);  L.  <L-  X.  R.  R.  Coal  and  Coke  Rates 
(26I.C.C.,27,  28). 

(777) 


778 

roundinjj:  the  ])arlicular  traffic  is  a  matter  to  be  decided  in 
each  iiidivichial  caso.^  This  gives  scope  for  the  exercise  of 
"  the  flexible  limit  of  judgment  which  belongs  to  the  power 
to  fix  rates."  - 

In  considering  cost  the  entire  movement  over  the  whole 
road  or  system  should  be  considered  as  a  whole  and  not 
divided  into  parts  to  produce  a  result  associated  with  such 
part.^ 

THE    VALUE    OF    THE    SERVICE. 

In  determining  reasonable  rates  for  the  carriage  of 
articles  which  are  the  subject  of  freight  transportation, 
the  value  of  the  commodity  is  one  of  the  material  considera- 
tions. That  is  to  say,  it  is  viewed  by  the  Commission  as 
unsound  that  rates  upon  carloads  of  equal  tonnage  and 
equal  cost  of  movement,  one  of  a  low-grade,  cheap  com- 
modity and  the  other  of  a  high-grade  and  valuable  com- 
modity, should  be  the  same.  Rates  as  a  whole  so  con- 
structed would  be  either  too  low  to  enable  the  carrier  to 
earn  a  reasonable  return  or  too  high  to  permit  the  eco- 
nomical movement  of  many  low-grade  but  necessary 
articles.*  Tlie  ad  valorem  principle  can  not  be  departed 
from  in  the  making  of  rates;  but  classification  of  freight 
cares  for  value  in  the  greater  part."^ 

The  term  "the  value  of  the  service"  in  its  last  analysis 
appears  to  be  synonymous  with  the  term  ''what  the  traffic 
will  bear,"  as  used  in  railroad  parlance.  In  20  I.  C.  C,  348, 
Commissioner  Lane  reviewed  the  testimony  of  Mr.  Ripley 
for  the  Railroads  to  the  effect  that  the  makers  of  rates  ''in 
the  first  instance  must  make  the  rate  such  as  to  permit 

1  Boileau  v.  P.  L.  &  E.  B.  R.  Co.  (22 1.  C.  C.,  652);  L.  &  N.  R.  R.  Coal  and  Coke  Rates 
(26 1.  CO.,  27,28);  Union  Tanning  Co.  v.  S.Ry.  Co.  (26I.C.C.,  163);  Iron  Ore  Rate  Cases 
(41  I.  C.  C,  181). 

2  Atlantic  Coast  Line  R.  R.  Co.  v.  N.  C.  Corporation  Corn.  (206  U.  S.,  1, 26);  i.  &  ^\R.  R. 
Coal  and  Coke  Rates  (26  I.  C.  C,  27,  28). 

3  St.  L.  ii  S.  F.  Ry.  V.  Gill  (156  U.  S.,  649,  665,  666);  L.  &  N.  R.  R.  Coal  and  Coke  Rate:i 
(261.  C.C.,30). 

♦  Union  Tanning  Co.  v.  S.  Ry.  Co.  (26  I.  C.  C,  163). 
Advances  in  Rates— Western  Case  (20  I.  C.  C,  3.55). 


779 

the  freest  intercourse  and  the  freest  interchange  of  com- 
modities in  the  comitry,  regardless  of  capital,  regardless  of 
cost — almost  regardless  of  cost,  but  entirely  regardless  of 
capital";  that  the  value  of  the  service  should  be  given  fii'st 
and  foremost  consideration,  leaving  cost  and  the  value  of 
the  properties  as  altogether  secondary;  the  capitalization 
of  the  railroads  "has  not,  never  did  have,  never  will  have, 
never  ought  to  have,  any  relation"  to  the  making  of  freight 
rates;  and  that  the  reasonable  rate  is  one  that  the  traffic 
would  bear,  and  the  amount  that  the  traffic  would  bear 
is  the  amount  of  charge  which  ''the  traffic  will  bear  and 
still  move  most  freely  and  enable  the  products  and  the 
manufactures  of  one  part  of  the  countr}^  to  be  used  to  the 
utmost  possible  extent  in  the  other."  After  this  review 
the  commissioner  said : 

Tliis  is  the  latest,  the  most  modern,  and  the  most  literal 
definition  of  this  much-abused  phrase.  *  *  *  This  is 
the  American  system  of  railroad  rate  making.^ 

In  Investigation  and  Suspension  Doclcet  26  to  26  C  (22 
I.  C.  C,  623),  the  Commission  considered  the  question 
whether  a  rate  is  unreasonable  that  does  not  pay  its 
full  share  of  all  the  related  expenses  which  the  carrier 
must  bear,  includeing  taxes,  fixed  charges,  and  dividends, 
and  points  out  that  under  a  theory  that  it  should  do  so, 
classification,  except  upon  a  basis  of  cost  of  transportation, 
plus  insurance  risk,  would  disappear  and  the  tariffs  of 
every  railroad  must  suffer  a  revolutionarj'  change.  Com- 
missioner Lane  said: 

In  all  classification  consideration  must  bo  given  to  what 
may  be  termed  public  policy,  the  advantage  to  the  com- 
munity of  having  some  kinds  of  freight  carried  at  a  less 
rate  than  other  kinds.  And  this  is  the  true  meaning  of 
the  phrase  "what  the  traffic  will  bear."  It  expresses  the 
consideration  that  must  be  shown  by  the  traffic  manager 
to  the  need  of  the  people  for  certain  commodities. 

'  A'lvin-tK  ■■?/  R'll^x-  Wesurn  Cant  (20  I.  C  C,  348,  349) 


780 

IXFLUEXCE    OF    ECOXOMICAL    OR    UNECONOMICAL    MANAGE- 
MENT   UPON    RATES. 

In  Advances  in  Rates—  Western  Case  (20  I.  C.  C,  334),  the 
Commission,  following  the  reasonino;  laid  down  in  prior 
cases,  said: 

*  *  *  A  premium  must  be  put  upon  efficiency  in  the 
operation  of  the  American  railroad.  Rates  can  not  be 
increased  with  each  new  demand  of  labor,  or  because  of 
wasteful,  corrupt,  or  indifferent  management.  Nor  should 
rates  be  reduced  with  each  succeeding  improvement  in 
method.  Society  should  not  take  from  the  wisely  man- 
aged railroad  the  benefits  which  flow  from  the  foresight, 
skill,  and  planned  cooperation  of  its  working  force.  We  may 
ruin  our  railroads  by  permitting  them  to  impose  each  new 
burden  of  obligation  upon  the  shipper.  And  we  can  make 
no  less  sure  of  their  economic  destruction  by  taking  from 
them  what  is  theirs  by  right  of  efhciency  of  operation — 
the  elimination  of  false  motion,  of  unneeded  effort,  and  the 
conservation  of  labor  and  materials.  The  standard  of 
rates  must  be  so  high  that  the  needed  carrier  which  serves 
its  public  with  honesty  and  reasonable  effort  may  live. 
And  yet  rates  should  be  still  so  much  below  the  'possible 
maximum  as  to  give  high  and  exceptional  reward  to  the 
especially  capable  management,  the  well-coordinated  force 
and  plant.  This  is  the  ideal,  unrealizable  perliaps,  but  it 
points  the  way. 

REASONABLE    RETURN    ON    FAIR    VALUE    OF    PROPERTY 
EMPLOYED. 

The  Supreme  Court  of  the  United  States,  in  Smythe  v. 
Ames  (169  U.  S.,  466),  laid  down  the  rule  which  has  been 
followed  that  the  basis  for  all  calculations  as  to  the  reason- 
ableness of  rates  to  be  charged  by  a  corporation  maintain- 
ing a  highway  under  legislative  sanction  must  be  the  fair 
value  of  the  property  being  used  by  it  for  the  convenience 
of  the  public.  The  Commission  in  Advances  in  Rates — ■ 
Western  case,  supra,  stated,  inter  alia: 

The  trend  of  the  highest  judicial  opinion  would  indicate 
that  we  should  accept  neither  the  cost  of  reproduction, 
*  *  *  nor  the  capitalization,  *  *  *  nor  the  prices 
of  stocks  and  bonds  in  the  market,  nor  yet  the  original 
investment  alone,  as  the  test  of  present  value  for  pur- 
poses of  rate  regulation.  Perhaps  the  nearest  approxi- 
mation to    the  fair  standard  is  that  of  bona  fide  invest- 


781 

ment— the  sacrifice  made  by  the  owners  of  the  property— 
considerino;  as  part  of  the  investment  any  shortage  of 
return  UiaT  tliere  mav  be  in  tlie  early  years  of  the  enterprise. 
Upon  this,  takincj  the  hfe  history  of  the  road  through  a 
num])er  of  years/its  promoters  are  entitled  to  a  reasonable 
return.  This,  however,  manifestly  is  limited;  for  a  return- 
should  not  be  given  upon  wastefulness,  mismanagement, 
or  poor  judgment,  and  alwaj-s  there  is  present  the  restric- 
tion that  no  more  than  a  reasonable  rate  shall  be  charged. 
(Advances  in  Bates— Western  Case,  20  I.  C.  C,  347.) 

TOX-MILE    AND    CAR-MILE    EARNINGS. 

A  ton-mile  rate,  while  often  instructive,  is  not  neces- 
sarily a  fair  index  of  a  reasonable  rate.  The  cheapest 
traffic  is  frcciuently  the  most  profitable  to  the  carrier. 
Low  percentage  of  operatmg  expenses  affects  the  question. 
It  is  usually  a  question,  not  of  the  absolute  rate  but  of 
the  conditions  under  which  the  traffic  is  handled. ^  Most 
of  the  freight  which  pays  the  carriers  the  best  is  that  which 
yields  the  lowest  rate  per  ton-mile.  This  arises  out  of 
many  facts  which  the  traffic  manager  takes  into  considera- 
tion, the  volume  of  traffic,  the  heavy  load  per  car,  and 
the  regularity  of  movement.-  In  many  cases  the  Com- 
mission has  found  car-mile  and  train-mile  earnings  a  fairer 
basis.' 

In  24  I.  C.  C,  566,  complainants  sought  to  make  a  com- 
parison between  ton-mile  earnings  on  lumber  and  water- 
melons. But  it  was  shown  that  although  ton-mile  earn- 
ings on  lumber  were  lower  than  on  watermelons  the  car- 
mile  earnings  were  higher.  The  Commission  said  that 
neither  furnished  an  absolute  test,  which  would  be  more 
nearly  found  in  a  combination  of  the  two;  but  did  not 
assent  to  the  comparison  because  lumber  moves  under  en- 
tirely different  conditions.^ 

In  Wisconsiii  Steel  Co.  v.  P.  d'  L.  K  R.  R.  Co.  (27 
I.  C.  C,  162,  163),  the  Commission  said  in  explanation 
of  Lalce  Cargo  Coal  Rate  Case,  that  while  a  fairer  basis  is 

1  Re  Proposed  Advances  in  Freight  Rates  (9 1.  C.  C,  396). 

i  Investigation  and  Suspension  Docket  2n  to  26C  (22  I.  C.  C.,  620). 

3/d. 

*Bahrenbury  Bra*  it  Co.  v.  A.  C  L.  H.  R.  Co.  (24  I.  C.  C,  J6(>). 


782 

found  ill  car-milo  and  train-niilc  earnings,  ton-mile  earn- 
ings are  instructive  and  are  to  be  considered.  Further- 
more, it  appears  that  train-mile  revenue  applies  to  solid 
train-load  lots.  "Each  case  must  be  determined  on  its 
merits,"  and  whore  the  facts  as  to  train  loading  are  not 
alike  the  ton-mile  earning  is  an  important  factor.^ 

The  conditions  under  which  ton-mileage,  car-mileage, 
and  train-mileage  become  guides  are  stated  by  the  Com- 
mission in  Traffic  Bureau  of  Nashville,  Tenn.  v.  L.  &  N. 
R.  R.  Co.  (28  i.  C.  C,  535)  as  follows: 

Ton-mile  statistics,  reflecting  as  they  do  neither  car 
loading,  train-tonnage,  nor  car  or  train  mileage,  are  far 
from  being  infallible  guides  in  fixing  freight  rates.  A  high 
average  ton-mile  revenue  may  be  due  to  short  hauls,  a  pre- 
ponderance of  which  occasions  the  railroad  traffic  manager 
much  uneasiness,  while  it  has  been  repeatedly  shown  that 
traffic  low  in  ton-mile  earnings  may,  because  of  its  farther 
carriage  and  greater  density,  be  the  most  remunerative. 
Per-car  earnings,  with  distance  considered,  are  much  more 
reliable.  Where  the  commodity  moves  in  train  loads  the 
earnings  per  train-mile  furnish  the  best  criterion,  not  only 
the  car  loading  but  also  such  physical  conditions  as  grades, 
etc.,  being  here  reflected.  Comparisons  of  any  kind, 
however,  to  be  effective  must  be  analogous,  or  nearly 
so;  that  is,  the  rate  charged  or  gross  earnings  derived  on 
any  basis  for  the  transportation  of  a  given  commodity 
between  two  points  furnishes  a  guide  in  arriving  at  the 
rate  to  be  charged  upon  the  same  or  nearly  the  same 
commodity  between  two  other  points  similarly  circum- 
stanced. 

In  Dressed  Beef  from  New  York,  N.  Y.  (38  I.  C.  C,  53), 
where  protestants  show^ed  that  the  average  ton-mile 
revenue  on  all  traffic  for  some  of  the  important  routes  over 
which  the  commodity  rate  in  question  applied  was  con- 
siderably less  than  the  ton-mile  revenue  which  the  com- 
modity rate  yielded,  the  Commission  said  that  "it  is  of 
little  weight  unsupported  by  the  exposition  of  the  char- 
acter and  length  of  haul  of  the  traffic  of  each  road." 

V.\LUE    OF    PROPERTY. 

Tlie  impracticability  of  considering  the  value  of  prop- 
erty as  returned  by  the  carriers  at  the  present  time  has 
been  commented  upon  by  the  Commis'sion. 


r.sin  Steel  Co.  v.  P.  <t  L.  E.  R.  R.  Co.  (27  I.  C.  C,  lf.2,  163). 


783 

Total  capitalization  of  a  carrier  is  not  necessarily  a  cor- 
rect measure  of  the  value  of  the  property  devoted  to  the 
public  use,  nor  is  it  in  many  instances  even  a  fair  indica- 
tion of  what  the  vahie  of  such  property  might  be/ 

The  nature  and  imreliability  of  the  property  investment 
accounts  of  carriers  have  frequently  been  commented  upon 
by  the  Commission  and  it  is  not  to  be  concluded  that  the 
Commission  regards  it  as  possible  to  secure  from  the  car- 
riers' books  and  records  complete  information  either  as  to 
the  cost  or  the  present  value  of  the  properties  devoted  by 
them  to  the  public  use.^  They  may,  however,  be  used  for 
the  purpose  of  comparison.^ 

NET  OPERATING  INCOME  AND  NET  CORPORATE  RETURN. 

A  proper  return  in  net  operating  income  might  not  re- 
sult in  a  net  corporate  income  sufhcient  to  meet  a  carriers' 
interest  and  dividend  requirements.  Interest  and  divi- 
dends are  computed  upon  tlie  par  value  of  securities,  and 
this  value  may  differ  widely  from  the  amounts  actually 
invested  in  the  property  on  which  an  adequate  return  is 
due.  This  is  especially  true  of  capital  stock,  which  is 
shown  as  a  liability  at  par  on  the  books  of  the  carriers, 
although  the  par  value  may  have  little  or  no  relation  to 
the  amount  of  cash  invested  in  the  property.  {The  Five 
Per  Cent  Case,  31  I.  C.  C,  362.) 

It  is  unnecessary  to  illustrate  further  the  impropriety 
of  accepting  net  corporate  income  as  a  measure  of  the  ade- 
quacy of  rates.  The  carriers,  however,  while  exhibitmg 
tlieir  returns  in  net  corporate  income,  have  very  properly 
placed  greater  dependence  upon  the  net  operating  income 
as  the  measure  of  the  sufficiency  of  their  returns,  and  we 
shaU  use  the  net  operating  income  of  these  carriers  as  the 
product  of  transportation  rates  that  should  be  examined 
in  order  to  determine,  so  far  as  we  may,  the  adequacy  and 
tendency  of  their  revenues.  {The  Five  Per  Cent  Case,  31 
I.  C.  C,  363.) 

COMMERCIAL   COMPETITION   AND   INTERESTS   OF  CONSUMERS. 

Commercial  competition  and  the  interests  of  consumers 
are  pertinent  considerations  in  rate  making.^  Consumers 
may  have  the  widest  possible  market  consistent  with  jus- 

1  Boileau  v.  P.  &  L.  E.  R.  R.  Co.  {2Z  I.  C.  C,  663). 

2  The  Five  Per  Cent  Case  (31  I.  C.  C,  360,  361,  302);  The  Five  Per  Cent  Case  (32  I.  C.  C. 
328);   Western  Passenger  Fares  (37  I.  C.  C,  28). 

3  The  Fifteen  Per  Cent  Case  (45  I.  C.  C,  313). 

*  Oallouay  Coal  Co.  et  al.  v.  Aln.  Gl.  So.  liy.  Co.  cl  al.  (40  I.  C.  C,  311,  320). 


784 

tioo  to  the  carriers,  and  cariiei's  inav,  within  reasonable 
limits,  as  a  matter  of  trallic  policy,  accord  the  same  rates 
for  difYerent  distances  from  common  centers.^  Proof  that 
rates  arc  the  result  of  competitive  forces  does  not  neces- 
sarily mean  that  they  are  too  low;  competition  may  be 
needed  to  kee])  them  at  a  reasonable  level.' 

DIFFERENT    EARNINGS    TO    DIFFERENT    CARRIERS. 

The  Commission  has  considered  on  several  occasions 
the  question  of  setting  rates  upon  a  particular  descrip- 
tion of  traffic  where  the  same  rate  if  carried  by  all  the 
roads  would  result  in  essentially  different  earnings  to  the 
different  carriers.  The  reasonableness  of  a  blanket  rate 
wdiich  shall  apply  to  a  number  of  carriers  can  not  be  de- 
termined by  considerations  alone  of  the  more  favorably 
situated  carriers,  or  of  the  less  favorably  situated.  The 
financial  conditions  of  the  carriers  will  differ;  some  earn- 
ings may  be  extravagant,  others  insufficient.  Reason- 
able rates  on  typical  lines  must  be  held  to  be  reasonable 
rates  for  all  lines.'* 

UNUNIFORM  RATES  AND  UNEQUAL  CONTRIBUTION  TO  FIXED 
CHARGES    AND    DIVIDENDS. 

There  is  a  wade  discretion  in  the  exercise  of  the  power 
to  fix  rates;  they  need  not  be  uniform  for  all  commodities 
nor  need  they  produce  the  same  percentage  of  profit  on 
all  kinds  of  business.  There  may  be  reasonable  adjust- 
ments and  classifications  giving  consideration  to  differ- 
ences in  the  articles  transported,  the  care  required  and 
risk  assumed,  and  the  value  of  the  service.  It  is  not 
necessary  to  prescribe  rates  for  every  individual  service 
performed,  but  services  may  be  grouped  by  fixing  rates 
for  classes  of  traffic.''     In  order  to  be  just  and  reasonable 


1  Dallas  Chamber  of  Com.  v.  A.  T.&  S.  F.  Ey.  Co.  (40  I.  C.  C,  619,  636). 

2  Western  Trunk  Lines  Iron  and  Steel  (47  I.  C.  C,  109,  113,  114). 

a  City  oj  Spokane  v.  No.  Vac.  Ry.  Co.  (15  I.  0.  C,  376,  393-394);  In  Re  Proposed  Advance 
in  Freight  Rates  (9  I.  C.  C,  382);  Kindd  v.  J\'.  K,  N.  H.  &  II.  R.  R.  Co.  (15  I.  C.  C.,  555, 
561);  Aduinas  in  Rjtes-Eistcrn  Case  {2Q1.V..Q:,  243,  274);  Newport  Mining  Co.x.  C. 
&  N.  ir.  Ry.  Co.  (33  I.  C.  C.,  645,  656);  1915  Western  Rate  Advance  Case  (35  I.  C.  C,  560, 
561);  Investigztion  and  Suspension  Docket  26  to  2f>  C  (22  I.  C.  C,  611). 

*  Nor.  Vac.  Ry.  v.  Nor.  Dak.  (236  U.  S.,  598,  599). 


785 

all  rates  need  not  be  fixed  on  a  basis  where  each  will  bear 
its  share  of  cost — all  related  expenses  which  the  carrier  must 
bear,  not  only  for^transportation  but  to  secure  an  adequate 
return  upon  its  property. »  If  such  were  necessary  all  rail- 
road tariffs  would  necessarily  be  revolutionized.  Public 
policy  requires  that  some  kinds  of  freight  shall  be  carried 
at  less  rate  than  other  kinds.  Classifications  attempt  to 
meet  such  requirements.^  Allowances  for  freight  equaliza- 
tions are  absorbed  out  of  profits.^ 

PRINCIPLES    GOVERNIXG    EXPRESS    RATES. 

Because  of  the  close  analogy  in  many  respects  between 
the  mails  and  the  express  and  their  transportation  in 
railroad  passenger  trains,  what  the  Commission  has  said 
with  respect  to  express  rates  becomes  relevant  and 
important. 

We  must  therefore  regard  these  great  forwardmg  com- 
panies as  agencies  created  by  the  railroads  and  recog-nized 
by  law  for  the  conduct  of  a  certain  kind  of  freight  business, 
to  which  these  agencies  haA'e  added  a  service  that  is  dis- 
tinctive and  peculiarl}^  their  own.  {In  re  Express  Rates, 
Practices,  Accounts,  and  Revenues,  24  I.  C.  C,  387.) 

It  must  be  treated  as  the  railroad  itself  would  be  treated. 
It  is  an  arm  of  the  railroad:  it  is  the  railroad  itself  reach- 
ing out  to  the  door  and  taking  the  package  and  delivering 
it  again  personally  to  the  consignee.     {Id.,  24 1.  C.  C,  419.) 

A  reasonable  express  rate  is  one  which  gives  reasonable 
compensation  to  the  rail  carrier  for  carrying  a  small  pack- 
age upon  a  passenger  train,  or  a  train  gomg  at  passenger 
speed,  plus  a  reasonable  compensation  for  the  service  of 
gathermg,  care,  and  delivering  wliich  the  express  company 
as  such  renders.  Manifestly,  mider  this  definition,  there 
should  be  a  higher  return  to  the  railroad  for  the  carriage  of 
express  matter  than  it  receives  upon  its  freight  traffic. 
This  should  be  so  because  of  the  superior  character  of  the 
service  given  as  well  as  to  prevent  the  movement  of  ordi- 
nary freight  upon  passenger  trains  under  express  rates. 

Can  there  be  a  fixed  relationship  between  express  and 
freight  rates  in  the  Unitcul  States  ?  We  have  sought  to  dis- 
cover some  such  basis,  and  theoretically  it  should  exist. 

I  Inve^itigjtion and  Suspension  Docktl  26  to  26 C  (22  I.  ('.  ('.,  r>23). 

J/d. 

«  The  .\nssouri  UivcT-Sebraska  Cases  (-10  I.  (".  ('.,  212,  213). 

122698—19—50 


786 

Owiuir,  however,  to  the  theory  or  lack  of  theory  upon  which 
frcisi;ht  rates  have  been  made,  this  is  not  found  to  he  prac- 
ticable.    {Id.,  24  I.  C.  C,  424.) 

rt  has  suggested  itself  that  there  might  be  some  relation 
between  the  rate  of  passenger  fare  and  the  express  rate, 
inasniucli  as  express  matter  and  passengers  were  carried 
upon  the  same  train.  An  effort  was  also  made  to  devise  a 
S3^stem  of  rates  that  would  give  chief  consideration  to  this 
suggestion.  The  first  question  that  arose  naturallv  was, 
What  relationship  should  exist  between  100  pounds  of  dead 
matter  carried  on  a  passenger  train  and  an  equal  wei2;ht 
in  living  persons  ?  Freight^men  have  testified  before  this 
Commission  that  for  many  purposes  one  passenger  was 
regarded  as  equal  to  a  ton  of  freight,  but  this  rude  measure 
leads  nowhere.  Nor  can  we  say  that  freight,  even  when 
moved  on  a  passenger  train,  sho\dd  pay  the  same  amount 
of  charge  that  may  properly  be  imposed  upon  the  pas- 
senger, for  the  single  reason  that  there  is  no  relationship 
between  the  carriage  of  a  passenger  and  the  carriage  of  so 
much  dead  freight,  even  though  the  car  that  carries  the 
one  is  in  the  same  train  that  carries  the  other.  Value  of 
service,  the  risk  of  the  railroad  company,  the  care  given, 
and  the  cost  of  necessary  terminals  and  stations  for"  both 
services  differ  widely.  While  railroads  have  sought  to  de- 
velop passenger  traffic  by  the  installation  of  fine  equipment, 
large  and  convenient  depots,  safety  appliances,  and  many 
special  accommodations,  no  one  would  urge  that  these  fea- 
tures are  necessary  to  or,  at  least,  were  introduced  for  the 
accommodation  of  express  matter.  In  fact,  it  may  be 
safely  said  that  the  railroads  have  treated  the  carriage  of 
small  parcels  as  an  onerous  burden 'which  could  not  be 
avoided  and  from  which  revenue  might  be  obtained,  but  to 
which  primary  concern  should  not  be  given.  {Id.,  24 
I.  C.  C,  426,  427.) 

As  to  the  standard  of  rates: 


3.  That  it  is  proper  for  the  Government  to  treat  the 
express  company  as  a  freight  forwarder  by  passenger  train, 
giving  supplemental  service  at  each  terminus,  and  inter- 
mediate care. 


5.  That  the  rate  should  not  include  more  than  a  reason- 
able compensation  for  the  service  given,  even  though  such 
compensation  falls  below  that  which  the  railroad  exacts  as  a 
minimum  for  the  carriage  of  100  pounds  of  freight.  {Id.,  24 
I.  C.  C,  431.) 


787 

The  service  performed  by  the  railway  company  incident 
to  the  transportation  of  express  matter  corresponds  in  a 
TQeasnre  to  that  ])erformed  in  connection  with  its  carload 
frcio-ht  traffic,  with  this  exception,  that  for  its  carload  busi- 
ness the  railway  must  bear  the  expense  of  accounting  and 
the  hability  for  loss  and  damage,  which  is  not  true  with 
respect  to'  express  traffic.  While  in  general  it  is  true 
that  express  traffic  is  transported  more  expeditiously  than 
freight  traffic,  the  fact  must  not  be  lost  sight  of  that  many 
fast  freight  trains  between  large  market  centers  make 
practically  the  same  time  as  express  trains,  if  not  with 
respect  to  point  of  speed,  at  least  with  respect  to  the 
utility  of  the  service  to  the  consignee.  {Id.,  24  I.  C.  C, 
458.V 

The  provisions  of  the  contracts  given  above  indicate  that 
express  rates  are  to  a  great  extent  under  the  control  of  the 
railway  companies.  Practically  every  existing  contract  in 
one  form  or  another  provides  that  the  rates  of  the  express 
companies  are  subject  to  the  approval  of  the  railway  con- 
pany.  These  provisions  further  show  that  the  express 
companies  have  two  standards  for  determming  rates — one 
based  on  competitive  conditions,  the  other,  where  competi- 
tion is  absent,  on  what  the  traffic  will  bear.  {Id.,  24 
I.  C.  C,  462,  4€3.) 

JUST    COMPENSATION. 

Just  compensation  is  guaranteed  by  the  Constitution  of 
the  United  States.  Just  compensation,  however,  does  not 
mean  that  there  shall  be  always  the  same  measure  of 
return  as  to  cost  and  value  of  property  in  every  case.  In 
Northern  Pacific  Railroad  v.  North  Dakota  (236  U.  S.,  599) 
the  United  States  Supreme  Court  said  that  if  in  the  case 
considered  there  exists  any  practice  or  what  may  be  taken  to 
be,  broadly  speaking,  a  standard  of  rates  with  respect  to  that 
traffic,  in  the  light  of  which  it  is  insisted  that  the  rates 
should  still  be  regarded  as  reasonable,  that  should  be  made 
to  appear.  This  Commission  found  in  Stonega  Coke  and 
Coal  Company  v.  L.  &  N.  R.  R.  Co.  (39  I.  C.  C,  543), 
that  the  coal  rates  in  the  region  under  consideration  were 
originally  made  without  any  consideration  of  cost  of 
service  or  any  transportation  or  traffic  conditions  other 
than  competition,  and  held  that  such  matter  of  commercial 
competition  was  responsi])le  for  a  standard  of  rates  in  the 


788 

li^ht  of  which  the  rates  involved  must  he  considered,  even 
if  it  had  been  found  that  these  rates  were  actually  non- 
coAipensatory. 

REASONABLE    RATE    AND    '^' FLEXIBLE    IJMIT    OF   jyj)GMENT." 

The  legislature  can  not  make  rates  which  confiscate  the 
carriers'  property,  nor  can  the  carriers  make  rates  which 
are  unjust  to  those  who  by  economic  necessity  are  com- 
pelled to  employ  their  services.^  In  22  I.  C.  C,  624, 
Commissioner  Lane,  for  the  Commission,  said: 

We  may  not  say  that  a  rate  shall  be  fixed  so  as  to  meet 
the  requirements  or  needs  of  any  body  of  shippers  in  their 
efforts  to  reach  a  given  market,  nor  may  we  establish  rates 
upon  any  articles  so  low  that  the 3^  will  not-  return  out-of- 
pocket  cost.  Neither  coidd  we  fix  an  entire  schedule  of 
rates  which  woidd  yield  an  madequate  return  upon  the 
fair  value  of  the  property  used  in  the  service  given." 
There  is,  however,  a  zone  within  which  we  may  properly 
exercise  "  the  flexible  limit  of  judgment  which  belongs  to 
.the  power  to  fix  rates."  These  are  the  words  of  the  Chief 
Justice  of  the  Supreme  Court  (206  U.  S.,  26).  There  is  no 
flexible  limit  of  judgment  if  all  rates  must  be  upon  a  level 
of  cost,  and  out  of  every  dollar  paid  to  the  carrier  must 
come  a  fixed  amomit  of  return  for  capital  invested.  The 
recognition  of  such  a  doctrine  has  never  been  suggested 
either  by  Congress  or  the  Supreme  Court.  A  just  and 
reasonable  rate  must  be  one  which  respects  alike  the 
carriers'  deserts  and  the  character  of  the  traffic.  It  can 
not  be  a  rate  that  takes  from  the  carrier  a  profit  and  thus 
favors  the  shipper  at  the  carrier's  expense,  nor  is  it  one 
wliich  compels  the  shipper  to  3deld  for  the  transportation 
given  a  sum  disproportionate  either  to  the  service  given 
by  the  carrier  or  to  the  service  rendered  to  the  shipper. 
The- words  "just  and  reasonable"  imply  the  application 
of  good  judgment  and  fairness,  of  common  sense  and  a 
sense  of  justice  to  a  given  condition  of  facts.  They  are  not 
fixed,  unalterable,  mathematical  terms.  Their  meaning 
implies  the  exercise  of  judgment,  and  against  the  improper 
exercise  of  that  judgment  the  Constitution  gives  protection, 
at  least  as  far  as  the  carriers  are  concerned. 

'  Advances  in  Rates—  Western  Case  (20  1.  C.  C,  317,  348.  356-357). 

o 


lie  BERKELEY  LIBRARIES 

Hlilililll 

COeSHSSBSS 


